After brief discussion on legal-talk, I have sent an email to the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet requesting explicit permission for OSM to use the PSMA Administrative Boundaries and I included concerns raised within legal-talk. I have had an informal phone call which acknowledged receipt of the request. Apparently they are already considering a request regarding OSM access to the GNAF (address) data and legal advice is being obtained about that too.
In regard to the suggestion that , if we get approval, then there should be a formal import of whole datasets : I do not have the skill to do that and it would require someone else to undertake it. However, it seems to me that such large scale imports create as many, or perhaps more, problems that they solve. A single way can be part of multiple boundaries - the most I have yet encountered is part of the NSW/Victorian boundary with a single way forming part of ten separate relations (State boundary, LGA boundary, locality boundary and national park boundary on NSW side with six on the Victorian side - the equivalent four plus two additional which I think were political boundaries but I am unsure). I am not very knowledgeable about this, so perhaps I am mistaken, but it appears that mass imports would bring multiple multipolygons all overlaid one on top of the other, and would not necessarily create relations for the boundaries. Many layers of lines along the same co-ordinates creates an editing problem where modification is required to the way for one of the multipolygons. Manual imports are slower to achieve but it seems to me that they are better in the long term. Nevertheless I am happy to accept the view of colleagues in this list if others also favour formal mass import (and presuming we get the permission that has been requested). On Thu, Jun 30, 2016, at 08:46 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote: > If you are going to bring in any more administrative boundaries can we > please do them as a formal import. If there was one thing that I learnt > from the experience of doing the NSW ones is that bringing them in > manually is a massive PITA. > > On 26/06/16 10:11, cleary wrote: > > Thanks to Simon and Andrew for your responses which I now understand. > > Can I now follow-on and request clarification about other data from > > data.gov.au - for example the sources listed in the wiki for > > Queensland Local Government Areas and QLD Suburb/Locality Boundaries > > which are CC-BY-4.0 but do not have restrictions such as the mailout > > condition in GNAF address data. Is it safe for me to add data from > > these Queensland administrative boundary data sources? > > I'm sorry to be a nuisance about the legality of our sources but I > > struggle with some of the nuances and I don't want to create problems > > that need to be sorted out at a later date. > > On Sun, Jun 26, 2016, at 01:09 AM, Simon Poole wrote: > >> > >> The simple answer is "NO", the G-NAF data is published under a > >> non-open custom licence and currently can not be used directly in OSM. > >> > >> Every communication we've had with the relevant authorities has > >> indicated that they are at this time not moving away from the > >> non-open licence. This may change in the future, but hasn't at this > >> point in time. > >> > >> Using it for QA etc. is likely possible, but given the low number of > >> addresses we have in Australia to start with is likely not going to > >> help a lot. > >> > >> Simon > >> > >> Am 25.06.2016 um 05:35 schrieb cleary: > >>> I'm sorry that I'm slow in picking up an old thread from about six > >>> months ago but I remain uncertain about the implications. > >>> > >>> As I understand the situation, the licence that accompanies the GNAF > >>> (address) data from data.gov.au is not itself adequate for OSM. > >>> However the data it is covered by the explicit permission to which > >>> Daniel O'Connor referred and which is clearly published in the OSM > >>> Wiki at > >>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attribution/data.gov.au_explicit_permission. > >>> Therefore it seems we are able to use the GNAF (address) data in OSM. > >>> > >>> Please correct me if I have misunderstood the issues in this discussion. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015, at 08:51 PM, Simon Poole wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I just had a quick look at the licence terms. While the license is > >>>> based on CC by 4.0 (which is own can of worms) it unluckily > >>>> contains a provision prohibiting specific use that makes the data > >>>> clearly (as in we will never, in no circumstances be able to adhere > >>>> to the terms) unusable for OSM and further means it does not meet > >>>> the definition herehttp://opendefinition.org/od/1.0/en/. > >>>> > >>>> Sorry > >>>> > >>>> Simon > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Am 07.12.2015 um 03:50 schrieb Daniel O'Connor: > >>>>> Hi all, > >>>>> Many of you may be interested in > >>>>> https://blog.data.gov.au/news-media/blog/geocoded-national-address-data-be-made-openly-available > >>>>> > >>>>> Provided the license is CC-BY-3.0 or better; we already have > >>>>> explicit permission to use said data: > >>>>> > >>>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attribution/data.gov.au_explicit_permission > >>>>> > >>>>> For those of you interested in what specific data this is, I'd > >>>>> encourage you to have a read of: > >>>>> https://www.psma.com.au/sites/default/files/g-naf_product_description.pdf > >>>>> > >>>>> Of interest to us: > >>>>> * Address points with geocoding and full structured address > >>>>> information > >>>>> * Authoritive street names for a given suburb, with geocoding > >>>>> (points though, not polylines) > >>>>> * Authoritative suburb/locality points, geocoded - likely of > >>>>> better accuracy than ABS "Statistic Suburb" data. > >>>>> * Data refreshed quarterly; sourced from local and state > >>>>> government (so emailing your council to submit a data correction > >>>>> from survey is plausible) > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Talk-au mailing list > >>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> _________________________________________________ > >>>> Talk-au mailing list > >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > >>>> > >>>> Email had 1 attachment: > >>>> > >>>> * > >>>> |signature.asc| > >>>> 1k (application/pgp-signature) > >>>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Talk-au mailing list > >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > >>> > >> _________________________________________________ > >> Talk-au mailing list > >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > >> > >> Email had 1 attachment: > >> > >> * > >> |signature.asc| > >> 1k (application/pgp-signature) > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-au mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
