[OSM-talk-be] Géomatique Wallonne - strategic plan

[Julien Fastré]

Hi,

Ben, Pieter,

I do not have any opposition as joining OKFN and OSM opinion in one
document. I thought it was more strategic to have two voices, but I am
not sure this reasoning match with reality.

I propose to write differently the chapter about "open source" in a way
which is more pragmatic. I might do this at the beginning of the week.

OK ?

Or I delete this chapter completely ?

@Jo: the permission to trace from WMS is included in our request to open
data globally. I also have contacts which focus more on web services.
But I will mention the persmissions of Brussels and Flanders (the
advance of wallonie and brussels is a quite good arguments with our
politics :-) ).

Julien


Le 15/03/14 12:04, Jo a écrit :
> Hi Julien,
>
> You mention we have permission to trace from Bing. In the mean time we
> have better imagery (higher resolution, more recent) in Flanders and
> Brussels provided by AGIV, which we are also allowed to trace. We also
> have permission to, if I understood correctly, to use their WMS (or is
> that CRAB) to trace/verify street names and house numbers.
>
> Maybe the Region Wallonne can do one better by allowing us to
> trace/reuse building outlines :-) like in Brussels Region.
>
> Open data and Open source are two orthogonal subjects, one can proces
> opendata with closed source software or closed data with open source
> software. We have a preference for software under free licenses, but
> everybody should be able/allowed to use whatever software they please
> and can afford as long as they comply with the licenses.
>
> Jo
>
>
> 2014-03-15 11:53 GMT+01:00 Ben Abelshausen <ben.abelshausen at gmail.com
> <mailto:ben.abelshausen at gmail.com>>:
>
>     First of all Julien: thanks for all your hard work and enthusiasm
>     in taking on this task! :-)
>
>     I think it is pretty obvious that we would want to promote usage
>     of open-source as well but I think this is something that is not
>     the task of our community.
>
>     We can recommend using open-source tools but the argument against
>     opening data cannot ever be 'open-data is not possible because
>     then we would have to use open-source software'. I think we should
>     be very very clear that these two are different. An excel document
>     with nice juicy open-data is still a good thing.
>
>     But we can still recommend using open-source tools, we just have
>     to be careful about how this is done in this document.
>
>     Also: We should be careful about positioning the OSM project in
>     Belgium as a project that wants to collect/incorporate open-data
>     sets. We are about collecting data in the form of mapping the
>     world, not about collecting open-geo-data sets. That was an
>     argument for me to join everything with OKFN into one document.
>
>     Met vriendelijke groeten,
>     Best regards,
>
>     Ben Abelshausen
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Talk-be mailing list
>     Talk-be at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-be at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20140315/15a6b9b6/attachment.htm>