At 2012-04-16 20:41, Toby Murray wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/16/2012 9:18 PM, Alan Mintz wrote:
>> At 2012-04-16 14:06, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>>> Or you can simply add odbl=clean if there's nothing ungood about the
>>> object (e.g. it was split from a TIGER way and the splitting is
>>> something you would have done anyway).
>> Is this really sufficient? Can someone from the redaction squad comment?
>> Can I protect/"bless" a way or node and prevent its redaction simply by
>> (in good faith) adding this tag?
> We have no idea what rules the OSMF will use.
Well I won't claim that communication has been great but this
statement is a little over dramatic.
First of all: odbl=clean *will* be honored.
...
On nodes as well as ways? As I wrote earlier, if I have tagged a way with a
source that includes imagery, and removed the tiger:reviewed=no tag, it
means I have aligned it to that imagery, including leaving nodes that are
in the correct place alone (sometimes). Can I bless the nodes in the same way?
Also there is this:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/What_is_clean%3F
A nice empty page. Tough to argue with :)
And of course the code is available for anyone to view... although I'm
not going to claim that this is really good documentation on the
matter:
https://github.com/zerebubuth/openstreetmap-license-change
Nor can you reasonably expect people to use this as a guideline. And I'm a
programmer.
There has been talk of the "v0 rule" which I believe is being
implemented in the code. This means that the act of creating an object
by a decliner doesn't automatically make it dirty. So if a way was
created by a decliner with the tag name=Fred and then someone else
added the tag highway=footway then after the bot gets done with it,
the way will still exist but only have the highway=footway tag. If an
accepting user changes the value of the name=* tag then it will be
clean... except, see the next paragraph. However if all of the way's
nodes are dirty and get removed then the way itself will have to go
too since you can't have a zero-node way.
I contend, though, that you should not have to change a node to make it
clean. If one has tagged a source with an imagery (or GPS) value, they are
saying that they vouch for the position of the way, including its nodes.
Same applies to removing tiger:reviewed=no (or gnis:reviewed=no). The user
is specifically claiming to have reviewed the position and tagging and
approved it. Should that not be sufficient?
Unfortunately neither badmap nor OSMI fully implement all of these
rules so yes there is still far too much uncertainty. But there are
some facts to be had.
Why, then, is it acceptable for us to be sitting here with a dagger hanging
over our heads, uncertain as to when and how it will fall? Shouldn't all of
this be nailed down, followed by a reasonable notice period? Why is there a
deadline other than "we need to get it done for the long-term benefit of OSM?"
--
Alan Mintz <alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net>
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
