SteveA,
Sorry for inconveniencing you and the cause.
Justin, I wish to be encouraging to you and others who post valuable
information here, and STRENGTHEN your voice here by weaving it into
the many strands of crowdsourced powerful truth.
I am sure people like you and the rest of the OSM community have
100% knowledge of when data is opened.
We don't. We have patchy, imperfect knowledge. We share here, and
in other places like wiki pages, at Mapping Parties, and through
other connections and outreach to fellow OSM contributors.
So when counties, states and governments around the globe open their
data, we should keep in mind the people like you (from California
where the grass is so green),
I admit the grass is green here. I also encourage others to find
that their grass is pretty green with some simple questions and
relatively easy-to-perform research into state laws. At least that
seems to work for the fifty states, which is the venue to which we
both speak here.
that thought out everything and know when data is opened, when to share.
I do not wish to come off as a know it all. I apologize if that is
how my previous post came across, as that was not my intention.
We the people will leave it to the experts (wonder why Steve left
OSM...). Cheers ;)
We, the People ARE the experts! And I have no intention of leaving
OSM. To a large degree, OSM is about learning. That is a vast, wide
dynamic, and I know that it happens at thousands of different degrees
along a vast spectrum, from beginner, to intermediate, to advanced.
Good for us for doing so and sharing so well as we do so!
Here's the deal; no question is dumb, when making people feel like
their first attempt to help the community isn't okay, they shut down
and think the community can take off... I recently watched a webinar
with Steve and James Fee who chatted about such a thing.
Justin, again, I did not wish to imply that your question was dumb.
Quite the contrary, I said it isn't a bad idea to post this, AND,
hey, I think it's a good idea to "amplify" that effort in an
organized way. Like, perhaps, keeping track via a wiki table of
fifty states, as a starting point. We can meet in some vague middle
there (along with others, besides you and me), and push it ahead. In
fact, we should! (By your efforts, my efforts and the efforts of
others).
just me .02
I'm glad we both shared!
SteveA
California
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 3:41 PM, stevea
<<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote:
This is great, so Thank You Justin. However, while county-at-a-time
"public data freedom" updates posted to talk-us isn't a BAD idea,
once again I think it is incumbent upon OSM in the USA to start
capturing the status (legality, to assuage any ODBL concerns) of
public access to public data on a wiki page as a small project. I
suggest we start statewide table and drill down to county or city
level when known/required to do so.
I'll start (well, reiterate): California has our Public Records
Act, so all GIS data held by a county or city here is available for
the asking. It's as plain and simple as that. No license terms are
even allowed to be attached to it, by that statute and upheld
explicitly by the California Supreme Court.
It may be that the credit due Minnesota (MetroGIS, other states...)
is simply public officials more widely recognizing that public data
are public data: if state law says so (and high court affirms
this), a re-iteration of this by a county agency doesn't make any
more true, but it is good news that this fact have its truthfulness
enjoy wider dissemination.
It is not whether or not a state or county agency "says so" that
makes state's or county's GIS data available (to you, and therefore
OSM, should it be a good idea to upload it), it is the state's
public records law. (Though, it doesn't hurt when a public agency
says they are explicit). Most, if not all states do (or should!)
have such laws. I believe it is a good responsibility of OSMers to
determine these laws (public policies) in all 50 states, and share
results. I believe California's very open (relatively liberal)
public records policy (law) is true in many more states, we (as OSM)
just don't know these explicitly. We should, and we should better
communicate them amongs ourselves.
Let us adjust our attitudes, not putting the cart before the horse:
in the first place, these data belong to us (we, the People), as
state law often explicitly says so. Agencies are not "masters" of
these data, but merely its trustees. That makes us (we, the People)
the data's rightful beneficiaries (and executors). Let us enjoy the
fruits of our labor: the public data we own and pay our agencies to
maintain, whose job it is to produce copies for us as we ask for
them. Free of any licensing terms, as the data are already ours.
SteveA
California
Today, Ramsey County, Minnesota opened its GIS data to the public.
Now access to street centerlines and parcel information is free for
the public to access. The data can be found
here:<http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/is/gisdata.htm>http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/is/gisdata.htm
Cheers,
Justin
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
