[talk-au] Taking "yes" for an answer.

[Richard Weait]

Let us bring back our presumption of good faith, shall we?  Several
posters here have suggested that data.gov.au don't know what
permissions they have and what permissions they may grant.  Another
has suggested that data.gov.au would be likely to pay attention to
every last detail of paperwork, and certainly intended to credit
Douglas Adams correctly  :-)

I, and LWG, presume that data.gov.au do in fact have all of their
licensing ducks in a row.  And that they took their time in completing
the discussion with LWG and gave it the sober governmental reflection
that it deserved.

LWG is unaware of any Australian OSM contributors having contacted
their various government agencies to request permission for inclusion
of that data in OSM.  So the LWG contacted data.gov.au and data.gov.au
think that having their data in OSM is a good thing.  Licenses and CTs
and all.  After long email correspondence data.gov.au have viewed the
text of the attribution page[1] and they find it "terrific".

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attribution#Australian_government_public_information_datasets