[Talk-GB] ODBL Coverage

[Richard Fairhurst]

Craig Loftus wrote:
> The town I currently map in, Oxford, would be wiped off the ODBL 
> map, with the exception of a few minor roads.

As someone who's been drawing open GPS-sourced maps in Oxford since even
before OSM was started, lives a short way outside the city, knows many of
the local mappers, and runs the local mailing list, I can happily say that
this assertion is complete nonsense. It shows exactly why you should take
these tools with not so much with a pinch of salt, more an entire Siberian
salt mine.

Off the top of my head, prolific Oxford mappers A, B, C, D and E (names
redacted to protect the innocent) dedicate their work to the public domain
anyway; mapper F is a share-alike enthusiast but has just confirmed to me
that he agrees with ODbL; I've not asked mappers G, H and I but they're
sensible, pragmatic chaps with no particular interest in copyright matters
and I'd be very surprised if any of them said no. Mapper J (who I don't know
personally) is AIUI not keen (largely for reasons of OS compatibility) but
is a comparative newcomer who arrived after the city had essentially been
surveyed; ITO Mapper suggests to me that his contributions are largely one
particular estate and some tag-fiddling elsewhere.

So to say it would be "wiped off the ODbL map" is clearly not true.


Moral 1: these visualisation tools are fun as far as they go but tell you
precisely nothing until everyone has been asked to accept the new licence,
which hasn't happened yet.

Moral 2: legal-talk is that way ----------------->

cheers
Richard


-- 
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/ODBL-Coverage-tp5743624p5743835.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.