On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 2:57 AM, Ian Sergeant <iserg...@hih.com.au> wrote: > When I have a v1 object that is non-CT compliant, then we have to assume the > further revisions may be derivatives.
Why do we have to assume this? > If CT-agreed mappers have added tags > from a survey in later revisions, then we can possibly grab those, but apart > from that it is a remapping effort that needs to be undertaken. How can that remapping effort avoid making a derivative? > However, when we have a v2 non-CT compliant object based on a v1 > CT-compliant one, it is a different story. Sure, but how do we recognize a v1 CT-compliant object? The average mapper does not have the legal expertise to determine CT compliance. > The objective is a CT-clean database, with the absolute minimum data loss. > > The discussion is about the best way to accomplish that, especially where we > have CT-agreed versions of objects that we want to leverage. I would suggest that having amateurs determine what is and is not compliant is most certainly not the best way to accomplish this. Furthermore, the goal is not to have a CT-clean database. You already have a CT-clean database. The goal, apparently, is to have an ODbL-clean database. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
