Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[John Smith]

On 29 July 2010 22:47, Steve Bennett  wrote:
> That was another question I meant to ask. Does one map in accordance
> with the legal jurisdiction that the OSM servers are within, the
> jurisdiction where the mapper is, or the jurisdiction of the area
> being mapped?

"You" personally need to care about your location, obvious, doesn't
matter why you do something if you break the law and get caught you
are still in trouble.

"OSM-F" covers themselves in a number of ways, firstly they actively
discourage copying from other sources unless you have express
permission, and secondly they are fairly reactive when it comes to
people making claims about copyright infringement.

None of the above would prevent a frivolous lawsuit no matter how much
you are in the right it could still be the equivalent of legal
extortion, ie do what we say or we'll sue you.

As for mapping remotely, that depends on your jurisdictions and any
cross border agreements in place between the remote country, take for
example the Aussie that was extradited to the US on charged of
criminal copyright infringement, he didn't break any local laws and he
never set foot in the US but they still managed to have him sent to
the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DrinkOrDie#Member_raids

In short, it all depends who you tick off and how much absolute power
they have to do something about it, and effort they want to put into
it.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Steve Bennett]

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> Wouldn't it be much simpler to define source:nearmap as implying
> attribution:nearmap, as opposed to using both tags.

Heh. It's "simple" in the sense that it's "simple" to wish upon a
star. To actual document and implement that implication in any
meaningful way is currently just about impossible. How would you do
it? Stick a note in the wiki? Many senior OSM users are deeply
suspicious of using the wiki for anything other than documenting
existing practice. How would you know whether this "implication" was
being implemented? How would you make it get implemented?

(Obviously I'm speaking wider than the specific case of
attribution/source=nearmap)

Incidentally, Nearmap would be well within their rights to insist on
attribution for any map data created with their editor, regardless of
whether or not it was based on Nearmap imagery.

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Steve Bennett]

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Ben Last  wrote:
> Indeed; the entire subject is shrouded in what I'd call "complexity", and
> what lawyers would call "my retirement beach house fund" :)  I look at it
> this way; imagine an eager Nearmap user buys a house in some newly developed
> area (such as Clarkson in WA, where the OSM streets frequently have no
> names) and sees that her street needs naming.  Enthusiastically, she clicks
> on the Edit button on our site, ready to help out.  What we don't want to do
> is present her with some long complex explanation of copyright and how it
> might or might not apply to her, the country she lives in and the source of
> her knowledge.  Instead, our thinking is that we present a simple "don't
> copy from existing maps" message and leave it at that.

Yes. I certainly think it's valid (and desirable) for a project like
this to shield users from the complexities of laws, by creating a
simpler policy that is guaranteed to be within the law. Wikipedia did
this by coming up with a specific set of "fair use" cases they
supported (whereas the law allows you to be as creative as you want,
since fair use is a legal defence, not an actual right).

I guess I'm questioning whether there's any need for that here, but
only half-heartedly. I have a couple of lawyer friends who I really
should set to work on this topic some day :)

(Before anyone asks, I almost always abide by the current policy of
not copying names from other sources. Occasionally I effectively copy
one, because I looked up a map in order to visit a place, and
therefore I "know" the name of it.)

I sure hope there are no councils around that claim copyright over the
set of all their street signs...

> Hmm... I'll ask that question internally :)  But it would be valid within
> Australian only,

That was another question I meant to ask. Does one map in accordance
with the legal jurisdiction that the OSM servers are within, the
jurisdiction where the mapper is, or the jurisdiction of the area
being mapped?

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Andrew Harvey]

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Ben Last  wrote:
> Interesting point, but the OSM wiki doesn't have much useful to say on the
> use of the attribution tag, and does make it clear that the source tag
> should record the source of derivation, so using source covers both cases
> neatly.  I suspect that, as with so many OSM tags, the intentions of the
> originators of the tag have been superseded by common usage :)

Wouldn't it be much simpler to define source:nearmap as implying
attribution:nearmap, as opposed to using both tags.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Ben Last]

On 29 July 2010 09:37, Steve Bennett  wrote:

> Heh, I'm glad you do, because it's far from obvious to me. Street
> names are not copyright. And certainly the copyright holders of street
> names are not map providers such as Google or Ausway. There is a very
> weak provision in some copyright jurisdictions to protect databases
> from wholesale copying, but I have a lot of trouble seeing how it
> applies here.

Indeed; the entire subject is shrouded in what I'd call "complexity", and
what lawyers would call "my retirement beach house fund" :)  I look at it
this way; imagine an eager Nearmap user buys a house in some newly developed
area (such as Clarkson in WA, where the OSM streets frequently have no
names) and sees that her street needs naming.  Enthusiastically, she clicks
on the Edit button on our site, ready to help out.  What we don't want to do
is present her with some long complex explanation of copyright and how it
might or might not apply to her, the country she lives in and the source of
her knowledge.  Instead, our thinking is that we present a simple "don't
copy from existing maps" message and leave it at that.


> Has Nearmap had any legal advice on this point? Could
> you share it?

Hmm... I'll ask that question internally :)  But it would be valid within
Australian only, and (as is disclosed in our latest ASX release), our
ambitions lie wider than that :)

Cheers
b

-- 
Ben Last
Development Manager (HyperWeb)
NearMap Pty Ltd
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Richard Weait]

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:37 PM, Steve Bennett  wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Ben Last  wrote:
>>> If that's not feasible, I hope you use some other technique to make it
>>> very
>>> clear to users that they must not copy street names from a non-free map.
>>
>> We understand this point very well :)
>
> Heh, I'm glad you do, because it's far from obvious to me. Street
> names are not copyright.

That depends on the jurisdiction.  A collection of items that would
not gain copyright individually can gain copyright protection based on
the effort of collecting them (Sweat of the Brow) or based on the way
that the items are presented (Skill and Judgment).  So those are both
concerns in some jurisdictions.

You might argue that "I can copy one name.  That one name can't be
protected based on systemic rights." But a content provider might
argue, "A series of OSM contributors each extracted small bits in a
way that was systemic and substantial..."

More often of concern is terms of use of the source material.  You are
restricted from extracting or deriving based on the terms and
conditions of the source site.

So it has been the accepted position of the OSM community, that out of
an abundance of caution, and an abundance of respect for copyright and
adjacent law, and an abundance of respect for the wishes, spirit and
licenses of publishers of maps, even proprietary maps, that "we don't
copy stuff from other maps without explicit permission."

But sometimes we get lazy and say, "Don't use copyright sources" as a
shorthand when we mean all of the above.  Because often our victims,
er, "conversational partners" glaze over after the first seven seconds
of that little lecture.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Steve Bennett]

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Ben Last  wrote:
>> If that's not feasible, I hope you use some other technique to make it
>> very
>> clear to users that they must not copy street names from a non-free map.
>
> We understand this point very well :)

Heh, I'm glad you do, because it's far from obvious to me. Street
names are not copyright. And certainly the copyright holders of street
names are not map providers such as Google or Ausway. There is a very
weak provision in some copyright jurisdictions to protect databases
from wholesale copying, but I have a lot of trouble seeing how it
applies here. Has Nearmap had any legal advice on this point? Could
you share it?

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Ben Last]

On 29 July 2010 08:32, Simon Biber  wrote:
>The established meaning of setting "source" to "nearmap" is that the
position of
>the object was traced from NearMap PhotoMaps. I don't think it's right to
set
>"source" to "nearmap" when a user on your website adds a name to a street,
since
>that information cannot be gained from PhotoMaps.
I'm not sure it's that clear-cut.  The original street may have been traced
from a different source, or added as the result of a GPS track, but the user
can identify which street it is by looking at the line of it because it is
overlaid on our map.  If the PhotoMap wasn't visible under the trace, I
would agree that source=nearmap isn't as valid, but because the map is an
essential part of the context that allows the user to confirm which street
it is, I'd argue that adding (rather than replacing) source=nearmap reflects
what's actually happening; the data is being *partially derived* from the
map.  And setting source=nearmap for adding housenumber nodes is even more
appropriate :)
Or would you argue that source isn't the correct tag to track the derivation
history of OSM data?


> I would encourage you to allow the user to specify the source of the name
> for
> each street they correct or add names to. These should be stored in the tag
> "source:name". Choices could be "survey" (checked the sign), "knowledge"
> (from
> memory), etc.
>
One issue that we face in trying to provide a simple interface to allow map
editing is hiding (as far as is possible) the complexity of OSM tagging
rules, many of which are unwritten, or become evident only by studying
common usage.  The more fields to fill in, the more complex the interface
and the less suitable for general users (i.e., those who are not mappers and
don't really care very much about mapping).  We might do this (as you
suggest, it's a good way to emphasise the "do not copy" rule), but that's
still under discussion.


> If that's not feasible, I hope you use some other technique to make it very
> clear to users that they must not copy street names from a non-free map.

We understand this point very well :)

Cheers
b

-- 
Ben Last
Development Manager (HyperWeb)
NearMap Pty Ltd
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Simon Biber]

Ben Last  wrote:
> Where a street name is added or corrected via our site, our current approach 
> is 
>to add or modify the source tag to be "nearmap", but yesterday I was 
>(coincidentally) looking at whether we should be appending to any existing 
>source so that we don't inadvertently remove attribution.  The wiki page is, 
>at 
>best, unclear on this subject.

The established meaning of setting "source" to "nearmap" is that the position 
of 
the object was traced from NearMap PhotoMaps. I don't think it's right to set 
"source" to "nearmap" when a user on your website adds a name to a street, 
since 
that information cannot be gained from PhotoMaps.

I would encourage you to allow the user to specify the source of the name for 
each street they correct or add names to. These should be stored in the tag 
"source:name". Choices could be "survey" (checked the sign), "knowledge" (from 
memory), etc.

If that's not feasible, I hope you use some other technique to make it very 
clear to users that they must not copy street names from a non-free map.



  


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Ben Last]

On 29 July 2010 08:13, Steve Bennett  wrote:

> Hmm, shouldn't we be using attribution=nearmap in that case? The two
> concepts are related but not quite the same. The source is (should
> be?) an internal marker for quality control, so we know where we got
> the data from, the attribution should be for giving credit.
>
Interesting point, but the OSM wiki doesn't have much useful to say on the
use of the attribution tag,
and does make it clear that the source tag should record the source of
derivation, so using source covers both cases neatly.  I suspect that, as
with so many OSM tags, the intentions of the originators of the tag have
been superseded by common usage :)

A similar situation exists when there is no existing source tag. If
> it's a long way and I'm modifying a small part of it, I sometimes set
> a tag of "source=unknown;nearmap".
>
I have, literally within the last five minutes, just written a bit of code
to do the same; append "nearmap" to the source when changing an existing OSM
entity rather than replace the source :)

>
> > basis of the derived data is enough attribution to comply; Potlatch does
> > that automatically.
> It's not totally automatic: you have to press 'b'.
>
Good point; I'd forgotten that...

Cheers
b

-- 
Ben Last
0423 475 673
Development Manager (HyperWeb)
NearMap Pty Ltd
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Steve Bennett]

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Ben Last  wrote:
> On 28 July 2010 23:43, Steve Bennett  wrote:
>> I would love to know whether Yahoo or Nearmap actually gives a damn.
> Obviously I can's peak for Yahoo (I think I should spell that "Yahoo!") but
> NearMap does care; we worked hard to make sure that our PhotoMaps could be
> used as the basis for OpenStreetMap, we want to support OSM and seeing
> "nearmap" as the source is a direct reflection of that :)  Plus our images
> are usable under CC-BY-SA, so the BY part is addressed by setting the
> source.

Hmm, shouldn't we be using attribution=nearmap in that case? The two
concepts are related but not quite the same. The source is (should
be?) an internal marker for quality control, so we know where we got
the data from, the attribution should be for giving credit.

An example where this distinction might matter would be generating
maps for an area and printing a list of the values of any attribution
tags within that area. You wouldn't want to show all source=* tags
(Credits: Nearmap, survey, gps, Yahoo, MMBW...), but you would want to
show attribution=* tags: (Credits: Nearmap, ABS).

(I am, currently, a very loyal source=nearmap tagger :))

> Personally, I'd welcome some more clarity on the use of the source tag when
> editing existing features.  We're working on providing easy edit access from
> our site to correct or add names to streets, and to add address-related
> information.  Where a street name is added or corrected via our site, our
> current approach is to add or modify the source tag to be "nearmap", but
> yesterday I was (coincidentally) looking at whether we should be appending
> to any existing source so that we don't inadvertently remove attribution.

A similar situation exists when there is no existing source tag. If
it's a long way and I'm modifying a small part of it, I sometimes set
a tag of "source=unknown;nearmap".

> basis of the derived data is enough attribution to comply; Potlatch does
> that automatically.

It's not totally automatic: you have to press 'b'.

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Ben Last]

On 28 July 2010 23:43, Steve Bennett  wrote:
> I would love to know whether Yahoo or Nearmap actually gives a damn.
Obviously I can's peak for Yahoo (I think I should spell that "Yahoo!") but
NearMap does care; we worked hard to make sure that our PhotoMaps could be
used as the basis for OpenStreetMap, we want to support OSM and seeing
"nearmap" as the source is a direct reflection of that :)  Plus our images
are usable under CC-BY-SA, so the BY part is addressed by setting the
source.

Personally, I'd welcome some more clarity on the use of the source tag when
editing existing features.  We're working on providing easy edit access from
our site to correct or add names to streets, and to add address-related
information.  Where a street name is added or corrected via our site, our
current approach is to add or modify the source tag to be "nearmap", but
yesterday I was (coincidentally) looking at whether we should be appending
to any existing source so that we don't inadvertently remove attribution.
 The wiki page  is, at best,
unclear on this subject.

...and John Smith  also commented:
> As for Nearmap, that is a curious situation in and of itself, on one
> hand you can only release data under a share alike license, primarily
>so they can have access to the data if they want, but they don't
> require attribution.
Hmm... not quite.  The licence linked to from our Community Licence
page is
CC-BY-SA 3.0 , which does
require attribution; one has to attribute our PhotoMaps to use when they're
used under that licence.  Our Community Licence page specifically addresses
using our PhotoMaps to derive data for OSM, making it clear that the deriver
owns the derived works, but must use CC-BY-SA to distribute them.  Use of
the source tag to mark our data as the basis of the derived data is enough
attribution to comply; Potlatch does that automatically.  And of course the OSM
wiki page about using our
dataalso
mentions the tag.

Cheers
b

-- 
Ben Last
Development Manager (HyperWeb)
NearMap Pty Ltd
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[John Smith]

On 29 July 2010 01:43, Steve Bennett  wrote:
> 1) Change the tag to source=nearmap: that's misattributing any parts
> of the way that you didn't update
> 2) Change the tag to source=yahoo;nearmap: tedious, but relatively accurate
> 3) Add source tags to the individual nodes that you moved: I often do
> this, but it's probably causing database bloat
> 4) Add source tags just to the changeset: IMHO this is insufficient,
> as it requires enormous effort later to retrieve changeset information
> and match it against ways, or vice versa.

5) Split the way and tag the bits actually changed, but suffers a
similar fate as tagging nodes in terms of unnessecary bloat...


> It's hard to say exactly at what point a way is no longer "sourced"
> from yahoo. What if hypothetically, the surface information came from
> yahoo, but the locations came from nearmap? It's tricky.

If you wanted to do this accurate, you'd tag each individual source:

source:location=nearmap
source:surface=yahoo
source:name=survey

but human nature is inherently lazy, why do all that when
source=nearmap more or less imparts the same information? :)

> I would love to know whether Yahoo or Nearmap actually gives a damn.

No idea about Yahoo, they only seem to have limited adoption of OSM
map data in the form of some very out of date flickr tiles in some
select location, maybe they were going to use more data but haven't
gotten round to it?

As for Nearmap, that is a curious situation in and of itself, on one
hand you can only release data under a share alike license, primarily
so they can have access to the data if they want, but they don't
require attribution.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Steve Bennett]

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> If an existing way was marked as source:yahoo, but I made some minor
> alterations from nearmap imagery what should I do to the source?

Unlike some of the other answers, I don't think it's at all clear what
to do here.

1) Change the tag to source=nearmap: that's misattributing any parts
of the way that you didn't update
2) Change the tag to source=yahoo;nearmap: tedious, but relatively accurate
3) Add source tags to the individual nodes that you moved: I often do
this, but it's probably causing database bloat
4) Add source tags just to the changeset: IMHO this is insufficient,
as it requires enormous effort later to retrieve changeset information
and match it against ways, or vice versa.

It's hard to say exactly at what point a way is no longer "sourced"
from yahoo. What if hypothetically, the surface information came from
yahoo, but the locations came from nearmap? It's tricky.

I would love to know whether Yahoo or Nearmap actually gives a damn.

Steve

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[John Smith]

On 28 July 2010 08:28, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> Okay, the only reason I was unsure is because if you only change part
> of the way from nearmap imagery then you have part sourced from
> nearmap, and part sourced from yahoo or survey.

In that case, while far from ideal, but more accurate, you could split
the way you fixed and update the source tag for that section.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Andrew Harvey]

> As John suggested if you modify a way that was tagged source=yahoo using 
> nearmap then it should be changed to source=nearmap.  It's no different to 
> changing from source=yahoo to source=survey when updating to something that 
> is now gps traced.

Okay, the only reason I was unsure is because if you only change part
of the way from nearmap imagery then you have part sourced from
nearmap, and part sourced from yahoo or survey.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Ross Scanlon]

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:52:01 -0700 (PDT)
Simon Biber  wrote:

> If there's a way tagged:
> 
>   highway=residential
>   name=Leigh Street
>   source=survey
> 
> And the positioning is obviously sub-standard (such as a single node for a 90 
> degree turn, where the street actually curves with a radius of 10 to 20 
> metres), 
> 
> 
> I would add, say, 4 more nodes to approximate the curve in the road, and 
> change 
> the tagging on the way to:
> 
>   highway=residential
>   name=Leigh Street
>   source:name=survey
>   source=nearmap

+1


-- 
Cheers
Ross

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Simon Biber]

If there's a way tagged:

  highway=residential
  name=Leigh Street
  source=survey

And the positioning is obviously sub-standard (such as a single node for a 90 
degree turn, where the street actually curves with a radius of 10 to 20 
metres), 


I would add, say, 4 more nodes to approximate the curve in the road, and change 
the tagging on the way to:

  highway=residential
  name=Leigh Street
  source:name=survey
  source=nearmap


  


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Ross Scanlon]

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 23:27:19 +1000
John Smith  wrote:

> On 27 July 2010 22:54, Ross Scanlon  wrote:
> > I'd be cautious about changing anything that is source=survey (gps or 
> > otherwise) though to source=nearmap.  I have done this in a couple of 
> > places but it's thing's like a road being made dual carriage way when it 
> > was originally a single carriageway, or the addition of a roundabout.
> 
> source=survey is slightly ambiguous, as that might refer to the source
> of the name, not the source of the location data, and you usually get
> better turn, intersection and curve data from Nearmap than any
> consumer grade gps...

Yes.

But I'd still be cautious about changing it without any other reference.

-- 
Cheers
Ross

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[John Smith]

On 27 July 2010 22:54, Ross Scanlon  wrote:
> I'd be cautious about changing anything that is source=survey (gps or 
> otherwise) though to source=nearmap.  I have done this in a couple of places 
> but it's thing's like a road being made dual carriage way when it was 
> originally a single carriageway, or the addition of a roundabout.

source=survey is slightly ambiguous, as that might refer to the source
of the name, not the source of the location data, and you usually get
better turn, intersection and curve data from Nearmap than any
consumer grade gps...

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Ross Scanlon]

> Also if I add a node to a way and tag that node as a highway:crossing
> positioned by nearmap imagery, should I just add source:nearmap to
> that new node? I ask because I came across I crossing node with no
> source tag, so I'm not sure if this implies the source was the same as
> the way that the node is on (survey) or was the source tag
> accidentally left off, or is the source tag not really needed for
> something minor like that?

If you add a highway=crossing from nearmap then it should be source=nearmap.  
That's the source of the infomation.

As you've suggested a node, as part of a way, with some sort of information 
without it's own source tag inherits the way's source tag.

As John suggested if you modify a way that was tagged source=yahoo using 
nearmap then it should be changed to source=nearmap.  It's no different to 
changing from source=yahoo to source=survey when updating to something that is 
now gps traced.

I'd be cautious about changing anything that is source=survey (gps or 
otherwise) though to source=nearmap.  I have done this in a couple of places 
but it's thing's like a road being made dual carriage way when it was 
originally a single carriageway, or the addition of a roundabout.

-- 
Cheers
Ross

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[John Smith]

On 27 July 2010 21:07, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> If an existing way was marked as source:yahoo, but I made some minor
> alterations from nearmap imagery what should I do to the source?
> Should I leave it as source:yahoo and add source:nearmap to the
> changeset? Or should I change the source:yahoo to source:nearmap? Or
> should I add a source:nearmap resulting in two source tags?

You can't add 2 source=* tags, you can do source=yahoo;nearmap, but in
general it's best to do source=nearmap because the yahoo imagery isn't
aligned in some places properly and is out of date in others.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[Andrew Harvey]

I have some questions about using the source tag.

If an existing way was marked as source:yahoo, but I made some minor
alterations from nearmap imagery what should I do to the source?
Should I leave it as source:yahoo and add source:nearmap to the
changeset? Or should I change the source:yahoo to source:nearmap? Or
should I add a source:nearmap resulting in two source tags?

Also if I add a node to a way and tag that node as a highway:crossing
positioned by nearmap imagery, should I just add source:nearmap to
that new node? I ask because I came across I crossing node with no
source tag, so I'm not sure if this implies the source was the same as
the way that the node is on (survey) or was the source tag
accidentally left off, or is the source tag not really needed for
something minor like that?

Sorry if this is not the place to ask these questions.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au