Re: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 65, Issue 24
Sigh. We really need a blanket policy of PD for government publications in AU. On 22/11/12 16:52, nicholas.g.lawre...@tmr.qld.gov.au wrote: Hi all, Mike from TMR got in touch with me this morning reversing his statement about using tourist route information on local council maps, see below. I haven't used them to add anything to OSM anyway. Hi Wil, Unfortunately your posting on Open Street Map has caused me some grief! It seems I was not correct in thinking that the maps I provided as reference material in PDF form can be freely used. Those on my GIS section with a greater understanding of copyright matters have decreed that copyright does actually exists over this information and therefore it cannot be made available to Open Street Maps. name, one of my GIS associates, can provide more information on copyright matters pertaining to this data if you wish to discuss possibilities but it seems likely that it will not be possible to use this data in the way you envisaged in the short term at least. You can reach name on number. My apologies for the confusion, but would you please update your posting to withdraw the expectation that the route marking information I provided can be made available to Open Street Map Kind regards, Mike Just to clarify, I am the name that was redacted. :-) Cheers, Nick *** WARNING: This email (including any attachments) may contain legally privileged, confidential or private information and may be protected by copyright. You may only use it if you are the person(s) it was intended to be sent to and if you use it in an authorised way. No one is allowed to use, review, alter, transmit, disclose, distribute, print or copy this email without appropriate authority. If this email was not intended for you and was sent to you by mistake, please telephone or email me immediately, destroy any hardcopies of this email and delete it and any copies of it from your computer system. Any right which the sender may have under copyright law, and any legal privilege and confidentiality attached to this email is not waived or destroyed by that mistake. It is your responsibility to ensure that this email does not contain and is not affected by computer viruses, defects or interference by third parties or replication problems (including incompatibility with your computer system). Opinions contained in this email do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Department of Transport and Main Roads, or endorsed organisations utilising the same infrastructure. *** ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 65, Issue 24
On 22/11/12 11:41, chuck sirron wrote: Hi all, Mike from TMR got in touch with me this morning reversing his statement about using tourist route information on local council maps, see below. I haven't used them to add anything to OSM anyway. Hi Wil, Unfortunately your posting on Open Street Map has caused me some grief! It seems I was not correct in thinking that the maps I provided as reference material in PDF form can be freely used. Those on my GIS section with a greater understanding of copyright matters have decreed that copyright does actually exists over this information and therefore it cannot be made available to Open Street Maps. name, one of my GIS associates, can provide more information on copyright matters pertaining to this data if you wish to discuss possibilities but it seems likely that it will not be possible to use this data in the way you envisaged in the short term at least. You can reach name on number. My apologies for the confusion, but would you please update your posting to withdraw the expectation that the route marking information I provided can be made available to Open Street Map Kind regards, * Mike* On 21/11/12 16:37, wil ly wrote: Ok, I just spoke to Mike Keeble from Transport and Main Roads Queensland who stated that the information is in the public domain and he is fine for me to put it into OSM, so long as TMR is not listed as the source. He advised that the information is public because it is on road signs (such as catalogued here: http://ozroads.com.au/) and all he has done in giving it to me is provide a collection of freely available information. He doesn't want TMR listed as a source as it has not been subject to QA. Wil Although everyone had the best intentions here, this is why I try to insist on only using any 3rd party source where a compatible license comes attached with the data or map you are sourcing from. Even if you have received verbal or direct correspondence with a person from the agency often their statements are not official department statements, but personal opinions as it appears to have happened in this case. Much the same as the blanket data.gov.au license which people on this list have attained from direct correspondence with a certain individual at the department. This just reinforces that at the end of the day we need to get outside and observe these route signs on the ground and re-map their locations based on that. Although we are slowly seeing more and more government data pro-actively released under open licenses, there is still a long way to go. At least TMR are engaging with the community. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach
OK, time I decided we don't really have any prospect of changing approved tags to address the dirt road situation. So I will push a model, sort of supported by the three votes recorded (! ). It will use existing tags (approved and unapproved) and accept that maps such as OSM's are unlikely to ever show the results. On the other hand, perhaps external projects will make better use of the data ? Li Xia, I believe you have plans to use this sort of data, might be good idea to confirm this works for you. (I have answered your two off list messages but wonder if you got my answers ?) I will push the idea that - * All unsealed roads should have a tracktype tag and a surface=unpaved tag. * 4wd roads should have a 4wd_only tag and a tracktype tag. Maybe even a smoothness tag if you like. * We will ask the mainstream renderers to observe the above tags. * Routers will be advised to note above. I have update the Australian Tagging Guidelines page and add some data to discussion tab. Particularly some numbers about current usage. And why tags starting with a digit are a bad idea. David On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 10:06 +1100, David wrote: Sorry folks, its me again ! A number of people have indicated that they agree we need to address this issue even if they don't particularly like my first go at it. So lets determine just what people here really do want. How about we vote for one of the several broad solutions possible ? I have put together a list of all the solutions mentioned in our recent discussion, if I missed one, please feel free to add it. See - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Davo I am right in saying other people with OSM credentials can edit my discussion page ? Please advise me if you cannot ! You can and should vote for or against several options if you feel so inclined. I suggest this might be better than more mailing list discussion, at present that discussion, while positive and good natured is covering too much space. If we agree on a broad model, we can then refine that if necessary on the list. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
