On 6 May 2011 18:42, Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net> wrote: > Peter Miller wrote: > > It does however seem disappointing for them to be duplicating > > some a lot of work. > > > > I agree that the OSM data is not perfect however it is good > > and could be even better very easily. > > AIUI they're not duplicating work. This is a "towpath condition" project, > not a "map the towpath" project. BW already knows where its towpaths are. > ;) > > I'm encouraging them to release under an OSM-compatible licence so that the > towpath condition data they collect can be incorporated into OSM. >
Makes sense. Thanks Richard. Regards, Peter > > cheers > Richard > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/New-British-Waterways-map-why-not-use-OSM-tp6337909p6338341.html > Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
