On Oct 22, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Alex Barth wrote:
> The data extracted by geocoding should just not lead to a substantial extract
> of the database, hence not producing a derivative database in the sense of
> the ODbL. I feel this would be within the spirit of why the ODbL was adopted
> (to encourage contribution) while clarifying an important use of OSM data
> that would create a huge incentive to improve data. Right now we largely
> don't have functioning municipal boundaries in OSM. Obviously, any data that
> is mixed into OSM data for _powering_ the geocoder would fall under share
> alike stipulations.
MySociety is working on derived municipal boundaries from OSM data:
http://global.mapit.mysociety.org/
E.g.:
http://global.mapit.mysociety.org/area/168844.html
There's data in there, and code out there that you could build on. The MapIt
service itself is non-commercial, but the code that drives it is
freely-available.
http://code.mapit.mysociety.org/
> You bring up the important problem of properly bounding the geocoding case.
> I'm thinking if all that can be extracted from OSM's database are names and
> addresses for lat/lon pairs or lat/lon pairs for names or addresses, it would
> be arguably impossible or at least impractically hard to recreate a
> functioning street network from it and the extracted data would be a narrow
> subset of OSM no matter how many locations are being geocoded. Thoughts?
This seems to match the spirit of the license as far as I understand it.
-mike.
----------------------------------------------------------------
michal migurski- [email protected]
415.558.1610
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
