No, I am not planning to import these. However, your notification that the data are available seems to be encouraging the data to BE imported into OSM. Of course, there is a "more correct" way to do that.
Perhaps I might encourage you to sharpen up your intention for notifying talk-ca of the availability of the data. Are they an additional source to ENTER into OSM? (Thus importing them). Or, perhaps you mean them to be a set of "comparison data" which might be used to verify or compare against the "other" data. Although, then, should there be a discrepancy, the question becomes "which are (more) correct?" I didn't see any of these issues addressed by your notification, which feel likes it begs these questions. Thank you in advance for any follow-up that better clarifies. Late notice just before I clicked Send: thanks to James for letting us know here that the data are ODbL and therefore OSM-compatible. (One down, perhaps a bit more to go). SteveA > On Mar 2, 2019, at 2:40 PM, john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Why are you planning to import it? > > Cheerio John > > On Sat, Mar 2, 2019, 5:26 PM OSM Volunteer stevea, > <stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote: > A responsible complement to this would be a link to license information, a > wiki page about these data, and perhaps an Import Plan should those data > actually be asserted to be worthy of being responsibly imported into OSM. > > SteveA > California > > > On Mar 2, 2019, at 2:17 PM, john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > https://github.com/Microsoft/CanadianBuildingFootprints > > > > So now there are two Open Data sources for building outlines in Canada. > > > > Cheerio John > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-ca mailing list > > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
