On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 8:45 AM, Lambert Carsten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 25 September 2008 17:21:59 Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > Lambert Carsten wrote: > > > This decision needs more thought. Although I personally don't have a > > > privacy issue here there are clearly those that do > > > > Just don't set your track as public - then the timestamps won't be > exposed. > > I am not looking to just solve my own personal 'problem'. > > What concerns me is that someone has made a decision that doesn't seem to > be > motivated and it is unclear (to me at least) who made it. I think that is a > problem for an organization like openstreetmap. The issue itself is not > insignificant for more than one reason. My concern is about good data and > this 'rule' makes it a lot harder for me to upload clean data. Others might > be concerned about privacy and change the data. And others again might not > make their data available to save themselves the hassle of changing the > data. > > Lambert > The GPX tracks are intended to show the basis for the ways and other data that is in the database, so I think one motivation for timestamps hearkens back to a desire to "show your work" to defend the source of OSM data against potential future claims of copyright infringement. In other words, with timestamps, it's more plausible that it was collected with an actual GPS receiver, instead of mocked up into GPX from some "tainted" source (with a license not compatible with OSM). Obviously timestamps could be synthesized (and I think there are even scripts that will do it for you if you want to upload your timestamp-less GPX tracks to OSM), but anyway, that's one reason I seem to recall why timestamps are required. Karl
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
