[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Other Routes with Public Access

[Dave F.]

On 24/03/2011 16:09, Mike Harris wrote:
> Dave
>
> I am interested in your opinion but please hold back slightly from 
> giving me instructions as to what to do or not do. There might be 
> other opinions.

Uh?
My initial post was a question, your first reply was an instruction!

>
> My use of the verb "assume" was more to ask for other opinions - and 
> thank you for yours - than to claim that my personal assumption (or 
> anyone else's for that matter) was a valid basis for OSM work. 
> Assumption differs from guessing inasmuch as there needs to be at 
> least some basis for the former!

I've looked it up, and nowhere does it say that making an assumption is 
asking for opinion:

assume
    1. To authenticate by means of belief; to surmise; to suppose to be 
true, especially without proof.

>
> To help me decide where I stand, please could you provide me with the 
> evidence for your statement that the acronym "ORPA" is copyright to 
> the OS? 

I didn't say that, which I think you know. Taking information from 
copyrighted data is illegal.

Seeing as you failed to answer previously, I'll ask my question again - 
Do these lists use the name ORPA?

> I have not seen it registered as a trade mark or similar? but perhaps 
> I have missed that. Does the copyright you mention extend to the 
> English language phrase "other routes with public access" - I would 
> have thought that such a phrase would be difficult to protect with 
> copyright?

If OS came up with the phrase & are its only users, I would say not, & 
err on the side of caution.

> I won't enter hear into the debate as to whether OSM should record 
> only and exclusively what can be seen on the ground as this has been 
> discussed endlessly. I suspect that your opinion is currently a 
> minority view. It seems to me that there are countless (in all sorts 
> of contexts) examples of people including in the database information 
> that cannot be seen on the ground e.g. the "source" tag.

It's disappointing you misinterpreted by comment as being exclusive; but 
maybe you needed to, to further your contrariness.

>
> Let's not get too dictatorial in this discussion!

Pot,  kettle. See my initial point above.

----------------

Back to ORPA.

With it using the vagueness of 'other' I'm failing to see it's 
usefulness. It only tells us what it is not & gives no indication of 
what it actually represents.

The alternative tags of foot, horse etc. are better used as they can be 
verified by other means than the OS.
In the cases of use I mentioned, the removal of ORPA did not reduce the 
accuracy of the ways.

*If* OS is the only source then I believe it should be be removed for 
reasons already stated.

Dave F.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20110325/65b372c1/attachment.html>