[Talk-ca] BC Open Data License compatibility

Russell Porter contact at russellporter.com
Thu Sep 8 06:00:30 BST 2011


Thanks for the clarification Steve and John.

I'm a software developer, not a lawyer, but hearing this really killed OSM
for me. PD would solve all the license shit we have to put up with - I won't
list the reasons why, we have all heard them before. Too bad some people are
hellbent on making sure corporations don't use OSM data as they please. It
is a detriment to the project, and for most people, they would probably be
happy to see their road being used in google maps, attribution or not.
Better than not seeing the road on any popular map at least.

I can't say I will be contributing to the project any more if the switch to
ODBL and new CT goes ahead as planned. It is painful enough a transition, we
might as well just take the leap to PD. Too bad, because the opportunities
for software development with OSM are just beginning.

Legalese is killing us when we should be focusing on making OSM better in
all respects.

Regards,
Russell

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:32 PM, <talk-ca-request at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to
>        talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        talk-ca-request at openstreetmap.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        talk-ca-owner at openstreetmap.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. CANVEC data and .odbl (john whelan)
>   2. Re: GeoTiff in JOSM (Tyler Gunn)
>   3. Re: BC Open Data License compatibility (SteveC)
>   4. Re: BC Open Data License compatibility (john whelan)
>   5. BC Highway tagging (Paul Norman)
>   6. Re: BC Open Data License compatibility (Steve Coast)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 07:47:48 -0400
> From: john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
> To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: [Talk-ca] CANVEC data and .odbl
> Message-ID:
>        <CAJ-Ex1HCu-wTaeT=QhuyN1B+ogqudDywjM-7raVDJ5ejLLcgTw at mail.gmail.com
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I was in JOSM and noticed some data that looked as if it was CANVEC imports
> but had been done by someone who has drifted off and not agreed to the new
> CT.  Is it worth someone doing a search for source CANVEC and CT not agreed
> for the whole of Canada so this data could be reimported whilst it can
> still
> be easily identified?
>
> The alternative is its gets deleted then its more difficult to identify
> which bits need to be reimported.
>
> I'm not volunteering by the way merely identifying a possible problem area.
>
> Cheerio John
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20110907/1914ceed/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 08:44:47 -0500
> From: Tyler Gunn <tyler at egunn.com>
> To: Paul Norman <penorman at mac.com>
> Cc: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] GeoTiff in JOSM
> Message-ID:
>        <CAPUij2uVRBHea8fK8xkNLHHjpA8i=SHF5Sbm0tB569fBUgi-VA at mail.gmail.com
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> > I believe you can also have JOSM get files directly from your hard drive,
> > but I'm not sure the syntax ?to do so on the Mac.
>
> I did a render with gdal2tiles and was able to get it working fine in
> Merkaator.  Something about the tile number origin being opposite in
> JOSM.
>
> > Maptiler is essentially a graphical front-end to gdal2tiles. Xjjk's
> version
> > is the command line version modified. My iMac broke awhile back so I'm
> not
> > sure how easy/hard GDAL is to set up with python bindings on OS X.
>
> Ah, okay.  I'll have to drop Xjik a line and see if I can get a copy
> of the modified command line file.   It seems there WAS a version of
> gdal2tiles tat was optimized for multi-core, but the author seems to
> be charging for it.
>
> There is a pre-made gdal install package for OSX, so it was extremely
> easy to get up.  Click and install.
>
> > You'll still be limited by your CPU :P
>
> On a single core my 1.9GB image took around 6 hours.  So not too bad
> but faster would be nice.
>
> > What I did for testing was work on a small section downloaded separately
> and
> > benchmarked with different image scaling methods. The three worth
> > considering are nearest, antialias, and lanczos. Nearest is fastest,
> > preserves sharp edges but has the worst quality. Antialias is decently
> fast,
> > decent quality. Lanczos is the best quality, preserves edges but is
> > extremely slow.
>
> I'll have to try modifying the render settings and see how it goes.
> I'll probably want to get the parallelized version first though.
>
> THanks!
> Tyler
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 17:24:19 -0600
> From: SteveC <steve at asklater.com>
> To: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] BC Open Data License compatibility
> Message-ID: <4E67FD23.3050307 at asklater.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
> On 9/4/2011 6:51 PM, john whelan wrote:
> > The issue with using data like this with OSM is when you contribute it
> > under the new contribution terms you accept that OSM can change the
> > license at a later date.  Practically speaking it makes it impossible
> > to respect any other license so currently only PD data and things you
> > have explicitly mapped yourself are safe.
> >
> > In the OSM talk thread there are people who seem to think that all
> > imports are bad and I suspect the license change clause was put in by
> > them to discourage imports.
>
> No, it was put in because we didn't want to have a rerun of all this
> mess if something better came along next time.
>
> Steve
>
>
> >
> > Cheerio John
> >
> > On 4 September 2011 19:35, Russell Porter <contact at russellporter.com
> > <mailto:contact at russellporter.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi,
> >
> >     What is the status on the BC Open Data site launched earlier this
> >     year?
> >
> >     License: http://www.data.gov.bc.ca/dbc/admin/terms.page?
> >
> >     It looks fine to me, but i know licensing is a big problem with osm.
> >
> >     In particular, i am looking at doing a manual import of protected
> >     areas amd hiking trails (I imported a bunch of NrCan protected
> >     areas a while back)
> >
> >     Finally, another license question. Since Sam V. (across canada
> >     trails) released his contribs as PD, cant i just re-import them
> >     into OSM on my account under odbl?
> >
> >     Thanks,
> >     Russell
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Talk-ca mailing list
> >     Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> >     http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-ca mailing list
> > Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20110907/b257b63c/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 20:56:57 -0400
> From: john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
> To: SteveC <steve at asklater.com>
> Cc: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] BC Open Data License compatibility
> Message-ID:
>        <CAJ-Ex1Hj=y=p6JQ6hMMuc5A1nOV8bQdnv71aJEoZv4LzQvh1rA at mail.gmail.com
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> No, it was put in because we didn't want to have a rerun of all this mess
> if
> something better came along next time.
>
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> Unfortunately it had implications that don't seem to have been thought
> through especially for imports which I think are important for Canada where
> we seem to have lots of places to map and a lower density of mappers on the
> ground than some areas.
>
> Cheerio John
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20110907/490b2bdc/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:37:34 -0700
> From: Paul Norman <penorman at mac.com>
> To: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> Cc: Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Talk-ca] BC Highway tagging
> Message-ID: <090201cc6dd8$a6294db0$f27be910$@mac.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> While reviewing the highways I travelled this long weekend (1, 5 to
> Kamloops, 5 to Clearwater, 1;97 to Sushwap, 1 to Hope, 7 to Vancouver) I
> came across some new tags on the relations. Taking Highway 7 as an example,
> the changes were
>
> -          The removal of name=Highway 7
>
> -          Changing network=ca_bc_primary to network=CA:BC
>
>
>
> On some other relations the tagging nhs=yes was added.
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:NHS
> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:NHS&action=history>
> &action=history indicates that this tag was first documented on Sept 6 by
> NE2.
>
>
>
> The name=* tags for the tree of Trans-Canada relations also seems to of
> been
> messed up.
>
>
>
> I am going to be doing some cleanup work on the names, but I'm uncertain
> what to do with the network tags. I'm unaware of any data consumers who
> actually use this data and have no strong preferences myself. It does seem
> wrong to change a consistent tagging standard with no prior discussion.
>
>
>
> The nhs=* tag also seems useless. When I investigated the NHS during my
> earlier work on consistent tagging of urban highways I found that NHS
> status
> did not mean anything in practical terms and did not correspond to who was
> responsible for road maintenance, who paid for the road, the condition of
> the road, the size of the road, the importance of the road, the signing or
> any other criteria I could think of.
>
>
>
> Normally I would do a more detailed investigation but in this case it is
> easier to fix the problem then fully investigate the exact details of the
> changes.  The relations in question are large relations and I'm not always
> able to determine when the changes were made through the web interface
> without timeouts.
>
>
>
> What are the thoughts of everyone on ca_bc_primary vs. CA:BC and the use of
> nhs=yes?
>
>
>
> Cc'ed NE2 since he may have been the one who made the changes.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20110907/ec0391ed/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 21:35:40 -0700
> From: Steve Coast <steve at asklater.com>
> To: john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
> Cc: "talk-ca at openstreetmap.org" <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] BC Open Data License compatibility
> Message-ID: <051C3031-DBDB-4DA6-9886-38632682770A at asklater.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Maybe it wasn't thought through and maybe it has implications, but that
> wasn't the point.
>
> Steve
>
> stevecoast.com
>
> On Sep 7, 2011, at 17:56, john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > No, it was put in because we didn't want to have a rerun of all this mess
> if something better came along next time.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately it had implications that don't seem to have been thought
> through especially for imports which I think are important for Canada where
> we seem to have lots of places to map and a lower density of mappers on the
> ground than some areas.
> >
> > Cheerio John
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20110907/1049f2f3/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
> End of Talk-ca Digest, Vol 43, Issue 8
> **************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20110907/1e88ae13/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-ca mailing list