Hi, Oh okay. If you are just using the KML as a background image, and copy/pasting segments after reviewing them in OSM then personally, I don't see any issues at all. I was just worried we were going to have an extra ton of "fixme" data, when we probably have enough to fix right now.
Probably still a good idea to put the permission to use statement on the wiki (for future mappers to understand), and use a consistent source= so people understand where they came from. Thanks, Ian. On 4 September 2012 13:26, Charles Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ian, > > Regarding the imports process, this wouldn't be a bulk automated import - > rather, me loading the KML as a background image, then selecting individual > ways and converting them to the appropriate type. There are less than 60 > separate lines in the state (and many are already in OSM) so it wouldn't > take me that long. Does that still need to go through the process? > > Regarding getting the license information in writing, that is one thing I > hadn't considered, I will ask my contact for details on this. > > Happy to leave it for a while - although I thought I saw a notice recently > that all redaction related changes were now complete? > > Regards, > > Charles > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Ian Sergeant <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> This needs to go through imports process (the imports list, and the >> imports on the wiki). We need to document the licence stuff so there >> are no problems later. >> >> Personally, I'd be inclined to sit on this for a month or two, until >> we are recovered from more of the redaction issues. Adding wires >> seems a bit like icing the cake when the sponge isn't set. >> >> And yes, the second would be my preferred option, too, but make the >> data available for people who want to merge. >> >> Ian. >> >> On 3 September 2012 21:25, Charles Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > I've received a KML of all of Tasmania's high voltage transmission lines >> > from a representative of Transend Networks, with no restrictions on >> > their >> > usage, so I am free to upload these into OSM. >> > >> > At the moment in OSM, some lines already exist and include towers >> > (sourced >> > from bing imagery), some only have towers (most likely due to >> > redaction), >> > and some lines are not marked at all. >> > >> > The KML file includes only lines - not towers - they have a license for >> > the >> > tower information - while it costs nothing, it can not be >> > re-distributed. >> > >> > I could >> > 1) Delete the existing data and replace with 100% official data, but >> > then >> > the tower information would be lost. >> > 2) Only replace the missing lines, but then there would be >> > inconsistencies >> > (some with towers, some without). >> > >> > What is the preferred option? I'm tending to go with the second >> > option, >> > since from a brief inspection, the existing OSM ways are pretty accurate >> > when compared with the official data. So long as the sources for each >> > line >> > are accurate it shouldn't be too much of an issue. >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Charles Gregory >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Talk-au mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >> > > > _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
