On 15/06/2011 11:57, Dave F. wrote:
On 13/06/2011 19:13, Renaud MICHEL wrote:
Of course it could be used to do so.
Without it, if there is strong suspicion that a user copied unauthorized
data, then all that user contributions will be deleted.
What a great way to discourage new mappers:
"We need you to admit the origin of your data so we can delete it if
it becomes incompatible with the new licence we're concocting. We
don't know whether it will be because we haven't bothered asking"
Sigh. Presumably this is a "Zawinski's Law" for OSM - "every question
however innocently asked leads to a discussion about relicensing".
The original request was from a user of OSM data - as I understand it
they're trying to see how the map involves and what sources are used to
do that (GPS traces, aerial imagery such as Bing, out-of-copyright maps,
etc.).
Personally, I'd encourage all mappers (newbies or otherwise) to use
"source" fields (e.g. "source=Bing", "source:name=survey") more than
they are currently used at the moment, because it helps future mappers
understand where previous data came from and how best to merge their new
data with it.
I wouldn't assume that, simply because something has been added without
a source tag it's necessarily due to a user uploading data that they
don't have a right to. As Bernard Ingham said, it's more likely to be
cock-up than conspiracy.
Cheers,
Andy
_______________________________________________
newbies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
