On 31/5/09 11:41, SteveC wrote:
On 31 May 2009, at 07:10, Marc Wick wrote:
There are fundamental differences between source code and data.
Share-alike code does not prevent you from building complex
applications, whereas share-alike data is a show stopper for anything
not absolutely trivial.
"..., OSM doesn't even let you do mashups." [1]
I understand that OdbL is trying to address and alleviate some of
these issues. Unfortunately I fear that I am not going to understand
'kafkaesque' legalese and I prefer licenses that I can understand
without having to consult a lawyer. Maybe somebody wants to take the
opportunity and explain in a few words how OdbL is supposed to work?
I said the process was kafkaesque, not the license itself. It always is,
look at the GPLv3 process.
The ODbL looks a bit like CC-BY-SA for data, except that if you make
something with the data (say, a printed map) then that 'produced work'
can be licensed however you like so long as you don't reverse engineer
the data back from that.
Who is "you" in this last phrase? If I (Dan) make a lovely map, and
publish PDF, GIF, JPEG and SVG versions of it online, that's OK? But if
the SVG version had fancy smart markup in it such that it could be
treated programmatically as geographic information, that would be
problematic? Am I (Dan) discouraged from making such an
accessibility-friendly version of my map available? Or are others simply
discouraged from making certain forms of re-use of that data? (eg. tools
for partially sighted users who might want non-visual map info...)
Dan
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
