Next Quarterly Project Apr May Jun 2018

I'm seeing a PDF file with "This​ ​license​ ​governs​ ​your​ ​access​ ​to​ ​and​ ​use​ ​of​ ​Geolytix​ ​Retail​ ​Points​ ​made​ ​available​ ​at www.geolytix.co.uk​​ ​by​ ​Geolytix​ ​Ltd. It​ ​incorporates​ ​the​ ​Open​ ​Government​ ​License​ ​for​ ​public​ ​sector​ ​information,​ ​see​ ​below​ ​and http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-license/​​ ​which​ ​is​ ​varied​ ​by​ ​the​ ​following terms:" The OGL v3 licence itself is fine, but it's those extra terms that are problematic for OSM. I believe they're probably there be there as a result of the previous OS OpenData Licence (which included similar variations). OS decided to switch to the plain OGL v3 for their OpenData a couple of years ago, and I believe that users of previously obtained OS OpenData can also re-licence anything based on that under the (unvaried) OGL v3 if they so wish. If you can switch to using the plain OGL v3 without any modifications, then everything should be fine. (You can still include whatever attribution statements you need, without actually modifying the licence itself.)

Re Post Office data, I believe that the location coordinates I've got in http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/postoffice/data/ are the best that Post Office Ltd have in their systems. The only issue with that dataset is that POL only want to provide updates once a year. (My understanding is that this is an admin/process thing, rather than because of any desire to ensure the data isn't up to date. So if someone else can do the providing for them, I don't think they'd object.)

On (Robert's) post office data: do you have any view on the accuracy of the remaining data? The OSM conflate tool can be run based on a distance threshold so we could use that as a first pass to pick up the easy matches. Either that or your tool's matching results if possible to convert to an OSM file (just high quality matches).

This would allow us to focus on mapping missing features (fun) rather than tag updates to existing features (less fun).

Cheers,
Rob

There seems to be three groups as far as locations are concerned. Most are pretty much spot on (e.g. within a few metres), some are slightly further away (up to 100m) but still roughly correct, and a few are much further out. At least some of the latter are due to a branch moving and POL not updating the location. My worry about using automated matching is that it would incorrectly match old locations in the last case. It also might incorrectly match an old OSM location to a correct new location, where the banch has only moved a couple of doors down the street (which isn't that uncommon).

For quarterly projects, I like ones that have a vague element/extension. So it's still a project if the local PO is already mapped.

If post offices(and shops with post offices) are the project...

When you visit your post office, check what's also near it. Is there a phone box, or some shops that need adding too?

Is there a suitable armchair extension too?

Are we going with post offices then? If you want an arm-chair extension, maybe adding building outlines from aerial imagery in the vicinity of each PO would do.

Yes we shall go with post offices. Thanks.

Have posted this to talk-gb and will put in in the next OSM UK newsletter when we send that :-) Happy mapping.