[Talk-it] Source dubbio

[Andrea Musuruane]

Hi Andy,

On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 10:56 PM Andy Townsend <ajt1047 a gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Andy from the DWG here.  Apologies for the delay in getting around to this.
>
> (automatic translation into Italian below)
>
> Currently as I understand it:
>
>    1. The licence under which this data was released isn't compatible
>    with OSM
>    2. The data quality isn't actually very good.
>
> With regard to (1) there is an option to try and obtain the data under a
> compatible licence.  However because of (2) we may not actually want to do
> that, and want to revert it anyway.
>
Exactly.

> If we do decide to revert it then we'll probably find that some data has
> been modified by other users since.  With this data we can again do one of
> two things:
>
>    1. Leave it, because newer edits by other users may have corrected
>    problems
>    2. Force through the revert, which will undo good mapping by people
>    unconnected with the import here.
>
> If the licence for the data isn't compatible then we'd normally tend to do
> (2) rather than (1) here.  Whichever we do there will be a lot of remapping
> to do and a lot of tidying up needed - afterwards I suspect that there will
> be things duplicated and things missing, however we do it.
>
It is my understanding local mappers waited for the revert. They didn't try
to correct issues or build upon these data.

> After we've finished any reversion we may then want to redact the data
> because it wasn't compatible with OSM in the first place.  If something is
> redacted the history will no longer be visible in OSM.  An example of what
> something looks like after it has been redacted is
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/325344168/history .
>
The redaction should be mandatory since these data aren't licensed under a
ODbL compatible license (and we have no waiver).

If we'll get a waiver in future, we'll propose a proper import (with proper
conflation!!!).

> Before starting on any of this, I just wanted to make sure that my
> understanding of the problem is correct:
>
>    - The data to be reverted is all changesets by
>    https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/fabioportinaro from
>    https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/69299082 onwards
>    - No other users have used the same data source directly
>    - The community thinks that a revert is the best way forward
>
> That's correct.

>
>
> It would also be useful to know if anyone thinks that the data might be
> available under a licence other than CC-BY-4.0 which might be compatible
> with OSM.
>
CC-BY-4.0  is the license chosen by Regione Piemonte for all their open
data. So the data aren't available under another license.

Best regards,

Andrea
-------------- parte successiva --------------
Un allegato HTML è stato rimosso...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/attachments/20190614/4bef138f/attachment.html>