[Talk-ca] Nova Scotia imports, and boundary=land_area

[Дмитрий Киселев]

Hi John,

Looks like the wiki needs amending to only list open data with the correct
> license either separately or a note added to each entry.


what's the status of OGL-CA is it compatible or not,
or compatible with some restrictions or only for some datasets?

StatsCan just published building footprints dataset under OGL-CA it's of
course quite controversial
do we want to import some parts of that dataset or not, but looks like
there is no concerns about
license compatibility (at least on mailing list),
Is that true or not, or we don't have legal answer which we can rely on?

вс, 21 окт. 2018 г. в 11:52, John Whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>:

> Looks like the wiki needs amending to only list open data with the correct
> license either separately or a note added to each entry.  I have noticed
> before there is no authority listed on the wiki.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> Дмитрий Киселев wrote on 2018-10-21 10:28 AM:
>
> About source, I suppose it's
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada#Open_Data [12]
>
> вс, 21 окт. 2018 г. в 10:20, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> there's a mapper in Canada - Darthmouthmapper - who seems to:
>>
>> 1. import data from a source he calls "Nova Scotia Open Data" - I am not
>> aware of any imports discussion, and the source specification is not
>> precise enough to determine the legal status of that. Judging from past
>> changeset comments, whatever imports procedure is used must have a
>> number of flaws.
>>
>> 2. import administrative boundaries
>>
>> 2a. as a mesh of closed ways (where most people would prefer relations),
>>
>> 2b. with, among other things, the tags "_Shape_Area_=yes",
>> "addrcountry=Canada" (no colon!), "addr:postcode" (which is not
>> generally used for objects that do not represent an address), and
>> "type=land_area" (which is not generally used on closed ways).
>>
>> 2c. The combination of a level-8 admin boundary and place=village is
>> also unusual (eg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/616463020) but I
>> cannot judge if this is normal in Canada. This is also used in
>> residential areas https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/636390857 - is this
>> area really a "village"?
>>
>> 3. use a ton of is_in tags which are highly unusual nowadays
>>
>> 4. occasionally change existing relations (not ways) from type=boundary
>> to type=land_area (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8417484/history
>> )
>>
>> 5. add addr:postcode and addr:province to place=village nodes
>>
>> 6. revert corrections applied to this by other users, claiming that "The
>> video and instructions state these can be part of the ways"
>>
>> A number of people have complained in the past
>>
>> http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=698649&commented
>> but many of the issues seem to be present still.
>>
>> Before I ask him to fix this -- are any of the behaviours / mapping
>> techniques outlined above somehow usual in Canada?
>>
>> Bye
>> Frederik
>>
>> --
>> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Dmitry
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing listTalk-ca at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
> --
> Sent from Postbox
> <https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
>


-- 
Best regards,
Dmitry
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20181101/f9e1a481/attachment.html>