> Rory McCann <r...@technomancy.org> hat am 07.12.2020 22:57 geschrieben: > > But I think this attribution is too vague. It's advice seems to restate the > relevant section from the ODbL. There are many examples of poor attribution > where someone could argue that they meet this standard.
As i have already explained to you in http://blog.imagico.de/the-osmf-changes-during-the-past-year-and-what-they-mean-for-the-coming-years-part-2/#comment-141145 the opposite is the case - the advise as formulated precisely explains the criterion for valid attribution. Attribution has the purpose to be perceived by humans. To determine if a certain form of attribution is acceptable you have to look at the effect it has on human perception while interacting with the produced work. It is understandable that to people with a primarily technical background this very concept appears uncomfortable and hard to grasp and their reflex is to substitute this with something purely technical where you can essentially program a test to verify if the attribution is OK independent of the human user. That cannot work. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
