> Isn't the purpose of "OSM and Contributors" to "credit" or "attribute" > the > source of the map tile data? >
Maybe, maybe not. More importantly - the fact that there's a discussion what this "mark" tries to communicate means that it fails to do it properly in the first place. At first glance I thought it was just sort of a banner to promote OSM but if it is to replace the legal attribution then it's not really doing that job. I support Kai's idea about separating the two functions. I like the Wikipedia example. It would be really cool to have a widely known "edit" button/symbol/"mark" sitting in the corner of embedded maps to show that the map is a living thing that can be corrected, enriched etc. I also agree with Tom - naming stuff *is* very important and is definitely not a side issue. Right now "contributors mark" suggests at least two different things - list of contributors or some kind of award for being a contributor and neither of them is true... This stuff should really be dead simple and intuitive, if you have to think about it as a user, explain, discuss then forget it, it won't work in the wild. Of course it's always harder to communicate more with less but that's the main challenge I see here... Paweł _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
