On Nov 5, 2018, at 7:29 AM, keith hartley <[email protected]> wrote: > I saw it was a great job. But you're correct, I have no documentation on how > they did it. Licence process, wiki ( I feel Steve already yelling at his > computer)
If you mean me, I'm saddened to hear that others think I "yell." Rather, my motivation is to see that: 1) High quality (or VERY high quality) data are what get uploaded to OSM, 2) License terms are compatible with ODbL (I respect how difficult this can be, especially with the limited bandwidth of OSM's LWG and the wide variety of activities taking place in a very widely geographically dispersed country like Canada) and 3) Communication about these efforts stay within a public realm (or "more public," as in "open source based protocols" rather than "secret sauce walkie talkies" hobbled by license agreements, like Facebook/Twitter/Instagram and Slack). Yes, primary among these are talk-ca and imports mailing lists, OSM's wiki pages, especially explicit Import Plans and Tasking Manager for projects "approved" by the wider community and actually underway. Right now, with John Whelan's (and others') recent newer thrusts to provide momentum to buildings getting entered (and/or improved) on Canada, I'm doing my best to "largely watch" (from the sidelines) what is happening right now. I see no reason to "burn bridges" when I don't mean to or need to do that. And yes, I do know that "you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar." (No, that isn't a slight at calling anybody "flies," rather a saying that means "positive encouragement works much better than throwing rocks"). SteveA California _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
