[Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

Thanks for this additional clarity, Stewart.

May I politely suggest you or another helpful volunteer update this "table wiki" to reflect that, perhaps with some text that says so?

If it makes sense to "blurb a note" into the Comments cell for a particular row (Grand Prairie, Muskoka, Edmonton), it seems that would stitch together the communication.  (Using the wiki, in the OSM way, so others can "at a glance" see status, progress...).

I find interesting regarding Edmonton, for example, that even with an incompatible licence (I don't know if north of the border it's with a c or an s) the Comments cell reads "80% done."  That "seems" like a contradiction, though, of course, it can't be.  It appears to mean "buildings are being entered around Edmonton regardless of the license incompatibilities."  In my experience in OSM, that sounds like a conversation, as we have here in talk-ca.

Yes, so, we're having it.  Part in talk-ca, part in the wiki, part in the map, part in email, part in the real world over coffee and talk.

More in the wiki, please?  Thanks, it feels like my work is done here!

SteveA
California

> On Jan 26, 2018, at 2:13 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scruss at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2018-01-25 04:00 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
>> The other wiki (linked to in the "main" BC2020i wiki's "Inventory of
>> Current Building Data Sets" section): 
>> https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Building_Canada_2020/building_OD_tables
> 
> Note that the licence compatibility column as it stands is a bit
> misleading now that the table has been split from the main page. There
> are a lot of entries that say ODL 1.0 or OGL 2.0 for instance. These
> will be the local spin a data licence, and each one will need to be
> individually approved by the LWG before the import process can be
> started. Examples:
> 
> * Grand Prairie - http://www.cityofgp.com/index.aspx?page=2332
> 
> * Muskoka -
> http://map.muskoka.on.ca/exponare/Open_Data/Open%20Government%20Licence_District%20Municipality%20of%20Muskoka%20GIS_2014.pdf
> 
> We don't yet have one licence that rules them all. For instance, the
> Edmonton imports (such as
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/28190793) look unapproved and
> incompatible.