[OSM-talk] [talk-au] Fwd: Re: Why PD is not better for business

paul youlten paul.youlten at gmail.com
Fri Dec 11 15:08:10 GMT 2009


Peter,

That sounds bad. Can you give us some examples?

PY

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Peter Childs <pchilds at bcs.org> wrote:
> 2009/12/11 paul youlten <paul.youlten at gmail.com>:
>> Dave,
>>
>> Clearly all those things, and much more, can and should be mapped.
>> They can all be seen on the street and they all have public access. I
>> agree: "If it's a physical entity then it can be mapped." ++
>>
>> What is less clear is what happens if changing the licence means we
>> lose "invisible" administrative boundaries and data from areas where
>> public access is difficult, restricted or non-existent.
>>
>> For example would be nice to include the boundaries of a UK National
>> Park or a site of special scientific interest or (dare I say it) the
>> coastline of Australia - but I don't think it is a "disaster" that
>> threatens the future of the project if these things are removed
>> because of a change in the licence.
>>
>> PY
>>
>
> From having seen it in quite a few Open Source projects, it would be a
> death sentence.
>
> Peter
>



-- 
Tel: +44(0) 7814 517 807




More information about the talk mailing list