[Talk-GB] ODBL Coverage

[Craig Loftus]

> Now please, take the legal debates back to legal-talk and stop trying to
> move them around.

I'm not some pro CT apparatchik trying to spread FUD, and I don't appreciate
the hostile reaction. I obviously asked a very silly or very old question.

>> Does any one have an objective update on how the OS issue
>> stands with regard to the new CTs?

> Now you're assuming that the CTs are not compatible with OpenData, a
> question which has yet to be resolved - some people believe that they
> are compatible.

Actually I wasn't assuming they're not compatible, I was asking about the
"OS issue" which I remember being the reason for why I "can't possibly
click agree yet". Given your reaction I assume the issue is still up in the air,
being shot at by everyone man and his dog.

> 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.

I wasn't suggesting that Oxford was mapped using OpenData licensed content.
I was actually using the visualisation with the understanding that there was a
strong OSM community in Oxford and that the visualisation might therefore
be used as a proxy measure of those who are waiting for the OS issue to be
resolved before agreeing to the terms.

> 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.

I'm afraid you misread Mapper J, he has no particular interest in copyright
matters, but doesn't want to see his tag-fiddling, whatever its perceived value,
go to waste.

Cheers,
Craig

On 16 November 2010 13:41, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
>
> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>