> Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2019 um 17:03 Uhr > Von: "Tom Lee via legal-talk" <legal-talk@openstreetmap.org> > > This is an admirable impulse, but it is worth emphasizing that those of > us who participate on OSM listservs are a small and unrepresentative > fraction of the project's 5.9 million registered users. Lists like this > one are a great way to find the slice of users who are most interested > and passionate about a particular issue, and who consequently can be > expected to have well-informed (and often strongly held) opinions that > reflect the gamut of possible answers.
I understand this, but the girls and guys here do already have some knowledge about this topic. I know many OSM mappers, which would never be able to discuss about this license questions. And many don't even use a GIS to be able to intersect two different data sources :-) > But if you are seeking consensus, the closest thing available is the > text of the license itself and guidelines that have been approved by > elected members of the OSMF board. Usually when there is broad agreement > on an issue, the answer is memorialized in a wiki page that people find > before they wind up here :-)_ Why doesn't the OSMF write about fundamental stuff then? I think, ST_Intersects() is one of the main tools in GIS world. Why don't give a clear statement on this? Since the ODbL has never changed, it's fixed. So there could be something like an FAQ or matrix to look up what triggers share-alike and what not? _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
