On Thursday 23 June 2011, John Smith wrote: > On 24 June 2011 01:02, Robert Scott <li...@humanleg.org.uk> wrote: > > Nearly all of the data was generated by OpenStreetMap contributors under > > the OpenStreetMap flag, so I think the attribution should be mostly to > > OpenStreetMap. > > For starters you are confusing OSM contributors with OSM-F who > operates the website and what not, as for flags how about pitching a > couple for companies either giving away data or giving away aerial > imagery that can be derived from. > > None of which, not even contributors, get a mention where most maps > attribute the companies that supplied data etc.
So - what, you're saying we should be doing the whole list-ten-thousand-names-in-the-corner thing? I don't understand - what's your point? That not all people who contributed that data agree to the odbl? No, but the vast majority of active mappers did. But they _all_ submitted it to a site under the understanding of a license that would attribute that work to "OpenStreetMap". I didn't think that was even being called into question. Or will you just call anything into question to keep the disruption going? More importantly, if "f"osm is so much more legitimate and important than OpenStreetMap, why are you still over here taking a dump on "our" list? robert. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
