Good idea trying to get clarification on the dataset terms and conditions.
I have done further investigations. As I said, the national dataset has
about 90% of pharmacies exactly located. But in the Kent data set does
not include this precise data and instead has the postcode centre as the
pharmacy position. IMHO, if we can get permission for the national level
data set, we should import/merge the good 90% (and manually survey the
remainder). If not, we can work on the inaccurate county level data and
manually survey pharmacies as needed. In either case, the web site tool
thing has a role.
I now have OSTN02 transformation working, which is nice.
I'll continue working on improving the usability of the site, and work
towards a public release of the code "real soon now". :) It would be
good to get several different data sets online and have a central
registry of them (on the wiki).
TimSC
On 25/05/11 23:43, Andy Mabbett wrote:
I've also reported the issue here:
http://data.gov.uk/dataset/location_of_pharmacies#comment-5657
On 25 May 2011 23:31, TimSC<mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk> wrote:
On 25/05/11 23:25, Andy Mabbett wrote:
Presumably you're using the data from the CSV, not the PDF?
In any case the OG license is more recent, and thus supersedes the
restrictive terms in the PDF.
The web site says "Except where otherwise noted this is the Open Government
Licence.". The data set does indeed say it has different conditions. I
suspect this is an oversight by the website or they couldn't be bothered to
update the PDF. I'll sleep on this one!
Regards,
Tim
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
