On Monday 18 May 2015, Rafael Avila Coya wrote: > > I honestly think that you are missing my point. I just say that this > restriction we are putting ourselves in dealing with this > compatibility/incompatibility of the CC-by 3.0 license, with the > requirement of getting an special permission, is controversial, and > not shared by all people. It's unclear why we have to do this.
Because the OSM community does not want to impose restrictions of other licenses like CC-BY on users of OSM data. Imports are therefore only accepted if the ODbL is the only license that applies to the data and this is not the case for CC-BY 3.0 data unless the right owner(s) give explicit permission to relicense under ODbL. > > This all looks very obscure - I already mentioned before, see: > > > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2014-November/003 > >564.html > > > > that proprietary IDs where mappers have no way to verify the > > validity of the ID have no place in OSM. > > That's your opinion. No, it's not, it is one of the core principles of OSM, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability I don't question the usefulness of these codes (although i would have used a more transparent, robust and universal addressing system but that is not the issue here), they just do not belong in OSM if there is no way for a mapper to verify the code. On a general note i would like to remind you that the purpose of these import discussions is to verify if the import plans are sound and identify and fix possible issues with these plans with the help of the OSM community. It does not really matter if concerns or objections raised during that process are personal opinions or not, they should be discussed based on their merit, not based on who brought them up. I can't help but notice in case of import proposals from humanitarian projects here there are usually only small and cosmetic changes (like renaming tags, amending import instructions) being made to the import plans after they are put up for discussion here. Even if in individual cases this might actually be appropriate in general this is not only annoying to those trying to help with suggestions here, it also undermines the whole import discussion process. And while i am into general remarks - since you have been organizing quite a lot of imports i would expect your import documentation to be a bit better during progress and after the import especially. This is not a requirement of course but it is a nice gesture towards future mappers to leave the import page on the wiki in a state that makes it easy fo a mapper to see what the import is about, if, when and how the import actually took place, who participated in it and if there was hand work involved in the process some basic statistics on how this turned out. I checked a few wiki pages from past imports you announced here and on most it is not even clear from the wiki page if the import actually took place. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list Imports@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports