On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 3:28 PM, andrzej zaborowski > No, this is just stupid.
Uh, that's a good argument. I'm sure the group of wikipedian's setting up their own osm maps server will be happy to hear that. > A page about a building or about a european route E30 has completely > nothing to do with with a pair of coordinates - this is just for > pretty display, has no semantical value. There's a 1:1 correspondence > between the subject of the page and the route relation or building way > in OSM though. I hope that wikipedia articles will not rely on elements id's from OSM as all objects can be droped and recreated with a new id. What is more reliable is the coordinates of the building (excepted when it is mounted on wheels on very rare cases). The problem of a route is different but I would hope that wikipedians will be able to generate their own rendering for such things (which they are starting to do). > If you actually take the time to read my mail, you'll notice this is > what I'm arguing against. > That'll obviously be vandalism. You just think about wikipedia. But if you also read my email, I suggest that when you allow this for wikipedia, you cannot forbid for the 10000000 other web sites who would like to be pointed by OSM. And who will decide that what is good for wikipedia is not good for microsoft bing or google bong or whatever. Then if you say "remove microsoft url's", they will call you a vandal ? Pieren _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
