[changing lists] On 15 December 2011 13:30, Jean-Marc Liotier <j...@liotier.org> wrote: > On 15/12/2011 13:17, David Groom wrote: >> Yes it should be considered a break, because in that case you know what >> the >> >> source for moving the nodes was. > > Good. Now do the license change impact auditing tools currently take that > into account ? Should they only take the object's source tag into account or > also mention of a source in the changeset commit comment ?
The source tag isn't very reliable in general, I know I tend to (if at all) use source=foo on ways where I have only derived the geometry from "foo" (e.g. imagery) and the attributes from local knowledge. Sometimes I'll use source=foo on a POI where I obtained the attributes from "foo" and the position was derived from nearby streets. In some specific cases it may be reliable though. In an import of UMP data in Poland we have been removing the source=UMP tag precisely to mark objects that are no longer derived from UMP in any way. Cheers _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
