[OSM-talk] Alternatives to wikipedia?

[Peter Miller]

On 18 Mar 2009, at 21:23, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

>
> Peter - are you really sure about geograph? AIUI only the photos are
> CC-BY-SA, the geolocation is OS-derived. Please check.

Barry pointed me at this post from 2006 when they nailed the situation  
down:
http://blog.dixo.net/2006/10/23/geograph-creative-commons-and-ordnance-survey-revisited/

I suggest that we discourage people from developing tools to  
automatically add features to OSM on mass derived from Geograph but  
that other than that it seems to be fair game and it is much clearer  
than normal in that the OS as sponsors of the project were forced to  
either accept the position or withdraw and kill the project so there  
was no way for the lawyers to avoid giving a clear answer.


Regards,


Peter


>
>
> Sorry for crap formatting, moving house so on mobile.
>
> Richard
>
>
> Peter Miller-7 wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 18 Mar 2009, at 17:11, Lester Caine wrote:
>>
>>> Tim 'avatar' Bartel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If we're going to cooperate with Wikipedia, then they need to
>>>>> cooperate with us by not allowing any dangling links.
>>>>
>>>> There are several reasons why this isn't possible, but the biggest
>>>> one
>>>> is the following: Wikipedia isn't controlled by the Wikimedia
>>>> Foundation but by the community. With whom do you like to make an
>>>> arrangement? It's pretty hard to make an arrangement with a  
>>>> community
>>>> consisting out of constantly changing people.
>>>
>>> That is probably the main reason who I would prefer to find an
>>> alternative 'location' to direct links to. And some useful  
>>> suggestions
>>> have already been made.
>>>
>>> While I CAN appreciate the idea of our own wiki. That would  
>>> require a
>>> lot more hardware. Viovio has several terabytes of images already,
>>> and I
>>> suspect wikitravel.org can probably top that. So sharing the load
>>> would
>>> sound a lot more sensible?
>>
>> As I see it there are a number of different sorts of 'associated'  
>> data
>> for OSM that needs a reliable and welcoming home somewhere:
>>
>> 1) Photos - these need to have locations and a direction or
>> alternatively two positions, one for the camera and one for the
>> subject of the photo. In addition to that it is useful to know when  
>> it
>> was taken and any special attributes, was it taken when it was
>> snowing, was it raining, is it a picture of something pretty or of a
>> defect or of a signpost or what. All of this information would allow
>> applications to decide which ones to use. A journey planner would  
>> show
>> pictures of the pretty things on the route but another application
>> might want to show defects to the local council or show illegal
>> parking to the police. So... there is a whole load of stuff to do  
>> with
>> photos , some pretty pictures of scenery can go in WikiTravel and
>> Viovio etc, but some of the other stuff wouldn't be appreciated there
>> and we might need to provide a home.
>>
>> 2) Articles - background information for a street, when it was
>> constructed, why, where its name came from and possibly plans for its
>> future. Hard to see who else would give this house-room.
>>
>> 3) Subjective information about ways - muddy in winter, poor  
>> lighting,
>> too narrow for a double buggy, very crowded on market days etc.
>>
>> I would like us to think about all this stuff. We need to decide  
>> which
>> bit below in Wikipedia (certainly the right place for articles about
>> towns), for Viovio (pretty pictures?), and which nerdy details about
>> traffic, pot poles, traffic signs and bus stop poles and origins of
>> street names belong in OSM and no-where else.
>>
>> Finally, lets not be frightened about the cost of another box and the
>> hosting because terrabytes and gigabytes are really cheap these days.
>> We have just bought a box with 7 Terrabytes of disk storage and it
>> cost <£100 per terrabyte. We are also about to import all 1,000,000  
>> of
>> photos of geographic features in the UK  from Geograph (all CCBYSA)  
>> to
>> see how it copes.
>>
>> Can I suggest that if we are serious about this that we get a wiki
>> page together with the brief for the project and see what it looks
>> like as we work on it. Does this project have a name and are in vague
>> agreement about the scope and the need?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Lester Caine - G8HFL
>>> -----------------------------
>>> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
>>> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
>>> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
>>> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
>>> Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> talk mailing list
>>> talk at openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> talk at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Alternatives-to-wikipedia--tp22574913p22588822.html
> Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at  
> Nabble.com.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk