[talk-au] Collaborative Australian Protected Areas Database (CAPAD) 2016

Andrew Harvey andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com
Mon Mar 19 22:01:38 UTC 2018


I recently approached the CAPAD owners and they completed the OSMF CC BY
waiver https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:CAPAD_CCBY_waiver.pdf so
we're in a better position re licensing now.

They requested some minor changes to the attribution statement to include
the contributing agencies which I've already changed at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Department_of_the_Environment_and_Energy

Is anyone currently working on comparing the CAPAD 2016 data with what's in
OSM?

On 30 August 2017 at 09:55, Andrew Harvey <andrew at alantgeo.com.au> wrote:

> Just wanted to add, that we should get the rights holder to complete the
> OSMF CC BY waiver
> https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ (regardless
> of if it's CC BY 3 or CC BY 4) before using this data.
>
> Also noting from the blog "Please do not forget that imports need to
> follow our Import Guidelines",
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
>
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2017, at 11:51 AM, nwastra wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Andrew
> > I remember reading about the rights holder not having time to review
> > their CC-BY xx wording for a while yet, so CC-BY 3.0 is ok.
> > This is a large import so I we expect it to take some time to get right
> > and it is preferable to wait for that instead of mappers adding the data
> > in a piecemeal fashion prior.
> > Keep up the good work.
> >
> > > On 29 Aug 2017, at 10:48 AM, Andrew Davidson <theswavu at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > The data came out over a month ago but I hadn't bothered to do any
> processing on it because I had been led to believe that the data was going
> to be released under CC-BY 4.0 and the OSM view seems to be that we need to
> get the rights holder to sign a wavier (https://www.mail-archive.com/
> talk-au at openstreetmap.org/msg10796.html) even if they had already said
> yes.
> > >
> > > However, I've just checked and the dataset is actually CC-BY 3.0 so we
> may still be OK to go.
> > >
> > > It'll take a while for me to recreate the processing I did on
> CAPAD2014 and I'm not sure when I'll have time to do it.
> > >
> > > On 29/8/17 10:16, nwastra wrote:
> > >> Further to my previous query…
> > >> I have viewed the thread leading to these…
> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2017-
> February/011272.html
> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2017-
> March/011302.html
> > >> and assume that the permission part is ok and the import is still on
> track.
> > >> Is there an update on the timeframe of the import?
> > >>> Hi
> > >>> I had been expecting that valid explicit permission to use
> Collaborative Australian Protected Areas Database (CAPAD) 2016 to edit and
> add information to the OpenStreetMap would have been obtained by now but I
> assume that the legal licence compatibility issues need to be resolved.
> > >>> Is there an estimated timeframe to resolution?
> > >>>
> > >>> regards
> > >>> Nev Wedding
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Talk-au mailing list
> > >> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-au mailing list
> > Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20180320/6f79b12c/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-au mailing list