[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

Jez Nicholson jez.nicholson at gmail.com
Wed Mar 30 08:23:22 UTC 2016

Reminds me of the OSMGB project from Notts Uni (I'm sure that someone here
was involved) which tried to make the OSM data more palatable. We should
learn lessons from it....but I'm not sure what those lessons would be
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 at 08:15, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net>

> Rob Nickerson wrote:
> > Is it OK to leave it to the data users to merge the open data with OSM
> > or is that burden too large for them to bother (at which point the
> > pressure of OSM in the UK reduces)?
> >
> > The reason I ask is because I don't have the answers. Hoping some
> > of the data users on the list may be able to suggest a point where
> > the burden would become too large.
> It's absolutely fine to let the data users merge the open data. Not least
> because you don't know, and shouldn't second-guess, _how_ they want to
> merge
> it.
> I use lots of UK open data on cycle.travel: built-up area outlines from OS
> OpenData, AADT traffic flows from dft.gov.uk. It's not at all difficult to
> integrate either of them into my OSM-based database. But I do it in the way
> that makes sense for my uses. If the data were integrated into OSM, chances
> are it would be done differently in some way (for example, the
> extrapolation
> from AADT survey points to B roads would be different) and therefore less
> suitable for my needs.
> People sometimes underestimate how lovely government open data[1] is to
> work
> with. It's consistently attributed, it comes in a file format everyone
> understands, it's layered, and best of all, it has consistent coverage. OSM
> is none of those. I love OSM dearly, obviously, but all my data-processing
> headaches are OSM-based.
> Concentrate on what makes OSM good and unique, not in redistributing a
> poorer-quality, harder-to-use mirror of other datasets.
> Signed, a data user.
> cheers
> Richard
> [1] except TIGER. And that was the one that got imported. Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Open-data-Was-Parliamentary-debate-mentions-OSM-tp5870653p5870931.html
> Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20160330/f1f3b291/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list