Hi Ian, One more thing. I realize that this is a controversial area. On our import MA building import we decided to not include the MassGIS building id. The id was just a munged centroid position and MassGIS indicated they don't intend for it to be preserved/maintained long term. Basically, the shape file needed a primary key, so they made one up. Unless the Chicago GIS people intend on preserving the id over the long term (like the gnis id), I would not bother including it. If somebody needs to match back to the original data set, they can just sort it out using centroids. Including it has the cost of discouraging non-expert mappers from improving the data.
It is no big deal if you feel differently, just adding my 2 cents. Thanks Jason. On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi imports, > > A couple weeks ago I sent this message about Chicago releasing some of their > data with an MIT license. Now that it's out and I've had some time to work > with it, I'd like to propose continuing the import of buildings in Chicago. > > As I mentioned, I already successfully imported roughly half the city's > buildings. Now that the dataset is licensed MIT, I would like to continue > from where I left off. > > Please see the wiki page I built here: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Chicago,_Illinois/Buildings_Import > > The local community is still very interested in this import (in fact they've > bugged me about continuing it since I stopped last year at various mapping > parties I've lead and Open Gov meetups), so I'm excited to get going again. > Please send any feedback you have as soon as possible so I can continue the > import later this week. > > Thanks! > Ian > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi imports, >> >> Earlier last year I downloaded the Chicago building footprints shapefile >> [0] from the Chicago data portal, chopped it into manageable bits and >> started importing it into OSM. Halfway through the process of merging and >> uploading this data I read the data portal's license [1] closer, discovering >> a clause that makes the datasets offered there incompatible with OSM. The >> troublesome clause allows the City of Chicago to require removal of any City >> data at any point in the future: >> >> "The City may require a user of this data to terminate any and all >> display, distribution or other use of any or all of the data provided at >> this website for any reason including, without limitation, violation of >> these Terms of Use or other terms as defined by City agencies or departments >> contributing data to this website." >> >> When I noticed this I immediately stopped uploading data and began a >> conversation with the city's data team to discuss ways OSM could move >> forward with using the datasets listed on the portal. >> >> After several months of phone calls, meetings, and waiting, I'm pleased to >> announce that the City of Chicago has started to release some of its >> datasets under the MIT license on GitHub: [2]. >> >> As a result of this new license, I will be able to continue importing the >> excellent buildings and address data into OSM (more on that later) and >> businesses will be able to use this data in their apps and tools without >> worrying about an untested license. >> >> I'm pretty excited about this, as Chicago is seen as a leader in municipal >> data and other OSM/Open Data folks can point to this as proof that open >> licensing is a very important part of open data. >> >> -Ian >> >> [0] https://data.cityofchicago.org/Buildings/Building-Footprints/w2v3-isjw >> [1] http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/narr/foia/data_disclaimer.html >> [2] https://github.com/chicago/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
