[OSM-talk] OSMHQ (Open Street Map High Quality): Viable Alternative For The National Map Corps

[Nathan Vander Wilt]

On Sep 2, 2008, at 7:47 AM, Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
> Nate,
>
> What data are you talking about? Do you mean the actual vector
> geometry created as part of the mapping, or do you mean the extra
> stuff, like the metadata and the photos?


Not sure exactly what you're asking, but I see I was a bit unclear  
myself below.

In my first paragraph, I was referring to all the data that is  
produced via federal money (e.g. USGS, NASA, Census Bureau, CIA,  
NOAA...) and is thus in the public domain. There's a lot of great US  
and world datasets from these agencies that have enabled, or at least  
got started, a lot of neat stuff because of the generous (non-)license  
Federal (and some state???) works are under.

In my second paragraph, I was referring to the data that you hope to  
encourage Corps members to continue to collect. If they are willing to  
continue having their work placed in the public domain, it might be  
best to keep it totally separate from OSM. If surveyors start with  
public domain base maps such as TIGER, revised with their own GPS  
traces, there can be no questions as to whether they are a "derived  
work" of a virally licensed dataset like OSM. (See http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2008-May/025912.html 
  for an example of the FUD spread on the idea of extracting PD data  
back out of OSM.)

Of course, some surveyors may prefer that their work be under a  
Copyleft license. That's fine, and I certainly wouldn't want to  
discourage anyone from contributing directly to OSM in that case. But  
if given a choice some would choose PD, please consider providing them  
a workspace where such a choice isn't compromised.

Have you been able to get into contact with any now-restless  
surveyors? lf so, and you'd like assistance in the matter, I know  
there are at least a few others on this list of similar mind with  
regards to the licensing problems.

thanks,
-natevw


> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Nathan Vander Wilt
> <nate-lists at calftrail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 19, 2008, at 12:22 PM, Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
>>>
>>> Note: This message will probably be of the most interset to OSM
>>> mappers in the United States.
>>>
>>> I was very disappointed in the recent shut down of the National Map
>>> Corps. This shutdown prompted me to consider if OSM could be a  
>>> viable
>>> alternative to the former federally sponsored base mapping of the
>>> United States. I started to put down some of my thoughts on paper. I
>>> realized that it wouldn't take a great deal of changes to have OSM
>>> fill this much needed role. I started to put together some  
>>> "suggested"
>>> procedures and other ideas that would increase the quality of OSM  
>>> data
>>> and allow it to provide "base map" layers for a traditional GIS.  
>>> I'll
>>> be trying out some of these ideas and procedures on a OSM mapping
>>> project near my home in Stockton, California.
>>
>> Here in the US, we have the wonderful benefit of a great deal of  
>> public
>> domain map data, because of federal sponsorships like that.
>>
>> Would it be possible, instead of putting this data directly into  
>> OSM, to set
>> up a separate database/webserver/API stack for the collection of  
>> data under
>> a public domain license? OSM could then certainly use this data,  
>> but the
>> main database's "public domain-ness" would not be compromised by  
>> the viral
>> license.
>>
>> thanks,
>> -natevw
>>