Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #450 2019-02-26-2019-03-04

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > How did you come to this conclusion? I counted 3 people not so > interested in attribution or OK with current state of things and > 16 agreeing either explicitly or implicitly with Richard's assessment > that there is a problem. I think WeeklyOSM were being very

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #450 2019-02-26-2019-03-04

I didn’t add my opinion because it seemed clear that most people thought that non-attribution is a problem. Let the record show that I also strongly support requiring attribution, so that more people will become aware of OSM and perhaps start to improve the data in their area. -Joseph Eisenberg

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #450 2019-02-26-2019-03-04

You write: "Issues with attributing OSM when using our data are nearly as old as our project. Richard Fairhurst addresses the issue of non-compliant attributions in a comprehensive post on the mailing list. Based on the

[OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #450 2019-02-26-2019-03-04

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 450, is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things happening in the openstreetmap world: http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/11685/ Enjoy! weeklyOSM? who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages