On 24 June 2011 01:27, Robert Scott <li...@humanleg.org.uk> wrote: > 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?
My point is, why should other sites be forced into attribution even OSM-F isn't willing to give it's own contributors, nor make it easy for people to find it without it being pointed out. > 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? You seem to be the one disrupting things, as far as I'm concerned I attributed to FOSM who in turn attributes their sources. > 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? You're the one making a big song and dance about things. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
