That's absolutely not my question. This has nothing to do with budget cutting, data.gov or any other initiative. I'm looking for a study/analysis comparing TIGER to OS and value creation
=== Ian White :: Urban Mapping Inc 26 O'Farrell Street Suite 310 :: San Francisco CA 94108 T.415.946.8170 X800 :: F.866.385.8266 :: urbanmapping.com<http://urbanmapping.com/> From: Miten Sampat <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 14:24:46 -0500 To: IHW <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] value in government open data? I believe most of those programs got cut during the recent budget reductions for .gov data -best, Miten On May 30, 2011, at 12:04 PM, Ian White wrote: I remember reading some kind of comparison of OS to Census/TIGER a few years ago from the perspective of value added activities—it highlighted the business value/investment added on to base map data and contrasted the then US experience with the UK charging for OS base data. Obviously the OS case isn't quite as relevant today, but wondering if anybody can remember seeing this post/study? Thx === Ian White :: Urban Mapping Inc 26 O'Farrell Street Suite 310 :: San Francisco CA 94108 T.415.946.8170 X800 :: F.866.385.8266 :: urbanmapping.com<http://urbanmapping.com/> _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org from the desk of @mitensampat
_______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
