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

Thu May 8 14:58:19 UTC 2014

Hi,

good news from the walloon front : the strategic plan for geomatica was
approved, and, following those who may read it, our request sent with
OKFN were heard !

The minister Henry asked to the SPW (his administration) to set up all
data from SPW as Open Data; they received a "green light" to do that.
Politically, it seems to me something really new.

Today and yesterday, there were meeting about the implementation of the
plan. I could not go there (sorry, I am quite busy at the moment).

I think we should get in contact with the next governement, in a few
days (I hope we won't have to make new contacts again...)

Julien

Le 25/03/14 17:34, Julien Fastré a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> We sent our opinion yesterday (thanks to Philippe).
>
> You may read  the final document here :
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Belgian_OSM_contributor_Opinion_to_plan_strat%C3%A9gique_geomatique_wallonne.pdf
>
> Julien
>
> (I do not understand why my links are transformed into pictures... I
> use the [[File:xyz.pdf]] but this does not appears as a <a > tag...
>
>
>
> Le 23/03/14 22:41, Julien Fastré a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> With the great help of Philippe Duchesnes, we wrote a single an
>> common review of the PSGW.
>>
>> Could you give us some comments before we send this ? Our deadline is
>> very short (this monday, end afternoon - the initial text was
>> submitted to our wiki).
>>
>> The RC text :
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wGZZndpoLEgJuT5fvVv6IkjaLKy6D43l5CUnTBo4z4g/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> The PSGW itself :
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/7/7b/Projet_de_plan_strat%C3%A9gique_g%C3%A9omatique_pour_la_Wallonie_%28Belgique%29.pdf
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Julien
>>
>> Le 15/03/14 12:16, Julien Fastré a écrit :
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-be mailing list
>>> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140508/e1c64463/attachment.htm>