Re: [Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

2016-03-30 Thread Jez Nicholson 
Reminds me of the OSMGB project from Notts Uni (I'm sure that someone here
was involved) which tried to make the OSM data more palatable. We should
learn lessons from itbut I'm not sure what those lessons would be
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 at 08:15, Richard Fairhurst 
wrote:

> Rob Nickerson wrote:
> > Is it OK to leave it to the data users to merge the open data with OSM
> > or is that burden too large for them to bother (at which point the
> > pressure of OSM in the UK reduces)?
> >
> > The reason I ask is because I don't have the answers. Hoping some
> > of the data users on the list may be able to suggest a point where
> > the burden would become too large.
>
> It's absolutely fine to let the data users merge the open data. Not least
> because you don't know, and shouldn't second-guess, _how_ they want to
> merge
> it.
>
> I use lots of UK open data on cycle.travel: built-up area outlines from OS
> OpenData, AADT traffic flows from dft.gov.uk. It's not at all difficult to
> integrate either of them into my OSM-based database. But I do it in the way
> that makes sense for my uses. If the data were integrated into OSM, chances
> are it would be done differently in some way (for example, the
> extrapolation
> from AADT survey points to B roads would be different) and therefore less
> suitable for my needs.
>
> People sometimes underestimate how lovely government open data[1] is to
> work
> with. It's consistently attributed, it comes in a file format everyone
> understands, it's layered, and best of all, it has consistent coverage. OSM
> is none of those. I love OSM dearly, obviously, but all my data-processing
> headaches are OSM-based.
>
> Concentrate on what makes OSM good and unique, not in redistributing a
> poorer-quality, harder-to-use mirror of other datasets.
>
> Signed, a data user.
>
> cheers
> Richard
>
> [1] except TIGER. And that was the one that got imported. Gaaah
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Open-data-Was-Parliamentary-debate-mentions-OSM-tp5870653p5870931.html
> Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

2016-03-30 Thread Richard Fairhurst 
Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Is it OK to leave it to the data users to merge the open data with OSM 
> or is that burden too large for them to bother (at which point the 
> pressure of OSM in the UK reduces)?
> 
> The reason I ask is because I don't have the answers. Hoping some 
> of the data users on the list may be able to suggest a point where 
> the burden would become too large.

It's absolutely fine to let the data users merge the open data. Not least
because you don't know, and shouldn't second-guess, _how_ they want to merge
it.

I use lots of UK open data on cycle.travel: built-up area outlines from OS
OpenData, AADT traffic flows from dft.gov.uk. It's not at all difficult to
integrate either of them into my OSM-based database. But I do it in the way
that makes sense for my uses. If the data were integrated into OSM, chances
are it would be done differently in some way (for example, the extrapolation
from AADT survey points to B roads would be different) and therefore less
suitable for my needs.

People sometimes underestimate how lovely government open data[1] is to work
with. It's consistently attributed, it comes in a file format everyone
understands, it's layered, and best of all, it has consistent coverage. OSM
is none of those. I love OSM dearly, obviously, but all my data-processing
headaches are OSM-based.

Concentrate on what makes OSM good and unique, not in redistributing a
poorer-quality, harder-to-use mirror of other datasets.

Signed, a data user.

cheers
Richard

[1] except TIGER. And that was the one that got imported. Gaaah



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Open-data-Was-Parliamentary-debate-mentions-OSM-tp5870653p5870931.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

2016-03-29 Thread Rob Nickerson 
Yeah I think that is a good benefit and will be an element end users
consider. Mixing data by country is however easy to do from an OSM licence
point of view. For example telenav use (or at least did use) OSM in the USA
but something else in other countries quite easily for many months.

Thus, although this helps, it doesn't "solve" everything.

Rob
On 29 Mar 2016 10:58 p.m., "Marc Gemis"  wrote:

> Isn't one of the main benefits to have the data for the whole world in
> 1 format ? Compare that to having to download open data files from
> government sites from all over the world from sites in different
> languages in different formats and having to combine those ...
>
> m
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Rob Nickerson
>  wrote:
> > Oh come on I'm not here to bash the history of OSM. I think what we have
> > done is incredible and I genuinely believe that the presence of OSM has
> > pushed both the government (the OS) and Google to where we are now -
> strong
> > competition and more open data.
> >
> > We have open data now - great. The question is how do we continue to push
> > the boundaries of the geospatial industry in the UK? Steve has in the
> past
> > said to focus on addresses. Perhaps if we did that then at some tipping
> > point the government will release all addresses as open data - a big
> success
> > and we move on to the next trigger...? But for how long can we continue
> to
> > be a strong trigger unless we can keep up with the status quo? Is it OK
> to
> > leave it to the data users to merge the open data with OSM or is that
> burden
> > too large for them to bother (at which point the pressure of OSM in the
> UK
> > reduces)?
> >
> > The reason I ask is because I don't have the answers. Hoping some of the
> > data users on the list may be able to suggest a point where the burden
> would
> > become too large.
> >
> > Please, don't get defensive as that gets us nowhere. Hopefully this is
> > something we can pick up in the coming year :-)
> >
> > Best,
> > Rob
> >
> >> On 29 Mar 2016 10:29 p.m., "Paul Sladen"  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2016, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> >>> > P.P.S. By which I'm asking: do you think that (unless we get loads of
> >>> > new
> >>> > mappers) more availability of open data possess a threat to OSM in
> the
> >>> > UK
> >>>
> >>> A decade ago a person called Steve needed a map and couldn't get one…
> >>>
> >>> We are here to assemble and curate data for now and the future, not to
> >>> chastise others following that lead and doing the same.
> >>>
> >>> -Paul
> >>>
> >>> ie. There is no 'threat' from having legitimately-usable open data: it
> >>> is the very premise upon OpenStreetMap was founded.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> >>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> >>>
> >>> iD8DBQFW+kqWc444tukM+iQRAv6JAJ9tkje/oy3kI2dZS33Gc4vaWBTcpgCgxitl
> >>> KdZlblnt33m57hNtNcfe4OQ=
> >>> =hke9
> >>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

2016-03-29 Thread Marc Gemis 
Isn't one of the main benefits to have the data for the whole world in
1 format ? Compare that to having to download open data files from
government sites from all over the world from sites in different
languages in different formats and having to combine those ...

m

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Rob Nickerson
 wrote:
> Oh come on I'm not here to bash the history of OSM. I think what we have
> done is incredible and I genuinely believe that the presence of OSM has
> pushed both the government (the OS) and Google to where we are now - strong
> competition and more open data.
>
> We have open data now - great. The question is how do we continue to push
> the boundaries of the geospatial industry in the UK? Steve has in the past
> said to focus on addresses. Perhaps if we did that then at some tipping
> point the government will release all addresses as open data - a big success
> and we move on to the next trigger...? But for how long can we continue to
> be a strong trigger unless we can keep up with the status quo? Is it OK to
> leave it to the data users to merge the open data with OSM or is that burden
> too large for them to bother (at which point the pressure of OSM in the UK
> reduces)?
>
> The reason I ask is because I don't have the answers. Hoping some of the
> data users on the list may be able to suggest a point where the burden would
> become too large.
>
> Please, don't get defensive as that gets us nowhere. Hopefully this is
> something we can pick up in the coming year :-)
>
> Best,
> Rob
>
>> On 29 Mar 2016 10:29 p.m., "Paul Sladen"  wrote:
>>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2016, Rob Nickerson wrote:
>>> > P.P.S. By which I'm asking: do you think that (unless we get loads of
>>> > new
>>> > mappers) more availability of open data possess a threat to OSM in the
>>> > UK
>>>
>>> A decade ago a person called Steve needed a map and couldn't get one…
>>>
>>> We are here to assemble and curate data for now and the future, not to
>>> chastise others following that lead and doing the same.
>>>
>>> -Paul
>>>
>>> ie. There is no 'threat' from having legitimately-usable open data: it
>>> is the very premise upon OpenStreetMap was founded.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>>>
>>> iD8DBQFW+kqWc444tukM+iQRAv6JAJ9tkje/oy3kI2dZS33Gc4vaWBTcpgCgxitl
>>> KdZlblnt33m57hNtNcfe4OQ=
>>> =hke9
>>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>>>
>>>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

2016-03-29 Thread Rob Nickerson 
Oh come on I'm not here to bash the history of OSM. I think what we have
done is incredible and I genuinely believe that the presence of OSM has
pushed both the government (the OS) and Google to where we are now - strong
competition and more open data.

We have open data now - great. The question is how do we continue to push
the boundaries of the geospatial industry in the UK? Steve has in the past
said to focus on addresses. Perhaps if we did that then at some tipping
point the government will release all addresses as open data - a big
success and we move on to the next trigger...? But for how long can we
continue to be a strong trigger unless we can keep up with the status quo?
Is it OK to leave it to the data users to merge the open data with OSM or
is that burden too large for them to bother (at which point the pressure of
OSM in the UK reduces)?

The reason I ask is because I don't have the answers. Hoping some of the
data users on the list may be able to suggest a point where the burden
would become too large.

Please, don't get defensive as that gets us nowhere. Hopefully this is
something we can pick up in the coming year :-)

Best,
Rob

> On 29 Mar 2016 10:29 p.m., "Paul Sladen"  wrote:
>>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2016, Rob Nickerson wrote:
>> > P.P.S. By which I'm asking: do you think that (unless we get loads of
new
>> > mappers) more availability of open data possess a threat to OSM in the
UK
>>
>> A decade ago a person called Steve needed a map and couldn't get one…
>>
>> We are here to assemble and curate data for now and the future, not to
>> chastise others following that lead and doing the same.
>>
>> -Paul
>>
>> ie. There is no 'threat' from having legitimately-usable open data: it
>> is the very premise upon OpenStreetMap was founded.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iD8DBQFW+kqWc444tukM+iQRAv6JAJ9tkje/oy3kI2dZS33Gc4vaWBTcpgCgxitl
>> KdZlblnt33m57hNtNcfe4OQ=
>> =hke9
>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>>
>>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb