Since my name is mentioned twice, it might be good to give some light to statement of the open issues.
Frederik Ramm schreef: > > Anyone suggesting to use ODbL 0.9 un-altered would be out of their mind > and thus I assume that nobody does. I have no official OSMF statement on > this in English, but Henk Hoff said on talk-de that OSMF expects the > current known issues to be ironed out in 1.0, and the phrase "fix > problems in 1.1" only applies to such problems that are not known yet. > > During the Telephone Debate the question was raised whether it would be good to bring the 1.0 license up for a vote if we still have serveral important open issues that are unanswered. General feeling within the call (at least that's how I felt it was) was that the open issues as mentioned in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Open_Issues needs to be answered before we put the 1.0 license up for a vote. This does not necessarily mean that all issues needs to be *resolved* in the 1.0 version. Besides: some of the open issues are mere general, like "Who is the licensor?" Cheers, Henk H. _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
