Re: [Talk-us] Territorial municipalities, Guam's villages (Max Erickson)

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

Guam now has its Municipalities entered as boundary=administrative + 
admin_level=6.

I also changed several named and human-settled areas from place=locality (which 
means uninhabited) to place=hamlet.  Hamlet seems appropriate as there appear 
to be no more than one or two hundred persons and the "next one bigger" 
(place=village) both seemed too large and could create confusion or ambiguity 
with the now-entered "Villages," which are properly named with the word 
"Municipality" at the end of their name.

Thanks, everybody!  (This thread now really IS closed).

SteveA
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Territorial municipalities, Guam's villages (Max Erickson)

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

Josh Lee writes:
"TIGER Line gives these village boundaries in the "County Subdivisions" file."

Thank you, I'm taking a look now.

Effectively closing this thread,
SteveA
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Territorial municipalities, Guam's villages (Max Erickson)

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

Thank you, Nelson.  Per the link (and a further link, which points to Simon Poole for the OSMF License Group):"But while neither CC nor the OSMF has undertaken a complete compatibility analysis, we have identified at least one  point of incompatibility and one possible challenge regarding attribution that lead us to our decision to continue to ask for explicit permission to use BY 4.0-licensed material in the OSM project."So, if OSM receives explicit permission (I can and have received such permission before, including open-ended permission on future published documents of a certain kind from AASHTO) we are OK.  That is satisfactory (I presume) if we get it, but I'd like to ask our community again:Are there are better data regarding Guam's villages/municipality boundaries, with terms compatible with OSM's ODbL?Thank you,SteveACalifornia
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Territorial municipalities, Guam's villages (Max Erickson)

[Kevin Kenny]

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 1:03 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea
 wrote:
>> Max Erickson  writes:
>>
>> The image the linked image was traced from provides no provenance
>> (beyond "Own work"). It's tough to go from there to being sure that
>> derived data is okay to contribute to OSM.
>
> It is explicitly CC BY-SA 4.0.  Does OSM have a problem with that?

Don't I recall that CC0 is the only CC license that isn't a problem?

BY - is attribution on the Contributors page good enough? Nobody knows,
so we ask for specific clearance.
SA - ODBL doesn't require SA for certain derivative works.
ND - Totally unacceptable for a database open for all to edit..
NC - We do not restrict the field of endeavour of our users.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Territorial municipalities, Guam's villages

[Max Erickson]

>> Max Erickson  writes:
>>
>> The image the linked image was traced from provides no provenance
>> (beyond "Own work"). It's tough to go from there to being sure that
>> derived data is okay to contribute to OSM.
>
>It is explicitly CC BY-SA 4.0.  Does OSM have a problem with that?
>
>SteveA
>California

I don't claim to speak for the gestalt that might be OSM, but all we
see there is that a Wikipedia editor, "Mr.Election" has asserted CC
BY-SA 4.0 over their contribution to the work. They give as a source
"This SVG map was traced from Guam-administracja", so to evaluate the
copyright status of the SVG, it is also necessary to evaluate the
copyright status of the Guam-administracja image. I don't see
sufficient provenance to come to a safe conclusion about the status of
the Guam-administracja image.

In any case, it seems similar boundaries are available from the Census.


Max

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

Re: [Talk-us] Territorial municipalities, Guam's villages (Max Erickson)

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

> Max Erickson  writes:
> 
> The image the linked image was traced from provides no provenance
> (beyond "Own work"). It's tough to go from there to being sure that
> derived data is okay to contribute to OSM.

It is explicitly CC BY-SA 4.0.  Does OSM have a problem with that?

SteveA
California

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

Re: [Talk-us] Territorial municipalities, Guam's villages

[Josh Lee]

TIGER Line gives these village boundaries in the "County Subdivisions" file.
https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2016/COUSUB/tl_2016_66_cousub.zip

The existing boundaries in Guam seem to be tagged as
[boundary=census], since they're Census-Designated Places imported
from an older version of TIGER. The 2016 vintage is better aligned
with the actual boundaries.


On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Max Erickson  wrote:
> The image the linked image was traced from provides no provenance
> (beyond "Own work"). It's tough to go from there to being sure that
> derived data is okay to contribute to OSM.
>
>
> Max
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

Re: [Talk-us] Territorial municipalities, Guam's villages

[Max Erickson]

The image the linked image was traced from provides no provenance
(beyond "Own work"). It's tough to go from there to being sure that
derived data is okay to contribute to OSM.


Max

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

[Talk-us] Territorial municipalities, Guam's villages

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

Does anybody know if the map of Guam's villages at 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villages_of_Guam#/media/File:Map_of_Guam_villages.svg
 is accurate and up-to-date?  It's rough, but usable, and appears compatible 
with OSM's ODbL.  Are there better data which OSM has permission to use?  
Guam's villages are "territorial municipalities," much like counties 
(admin_level=6) in the 50 US states (says the Census Bureau and an OSM 
consensus that so tags other such things).

Those now entered into OSM are much smaller than the villages in that map.  It 
may be that the OSM-entered villages are administrative subdivisions even 
smaller than the officially-designated "villages."  For example, OSM has a 
village named Ordot which "fits into" the municipality of Chalan Pago-Ordot.  
But I don't want to guess or speculate, I'd like these ambiguities resolved so 
we can correctly tag Guam's municipalities.

Are there any Guam-savvy readers on talk-us?  Håfa ådai!

Puedi ha' todu maolek,

Nå'ån-hu si SteveA
Taotao California yo'
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us