On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
In my opinion, changeset-based sources also make it clear which edit was
using which source. For example, since good Bing imagery has become
available, I've developed a habit to trace the buildings in an area from
Bing,
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
ava...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been away for a while. But it seems to me from reading the terms
that I can't say yes to them in good faith, not because I don't want
to, but because I remember I derived a few things from external
CC-BY-SA,
Steve Bennett-3 wrote:
Hi Aevar,
Out of curiosity, how do you derive stuff from a CC-BY-SA source
without making a note of the source? I mean, the -BY- part means you
have to attribute the source. So presumably you weren't in compliance
with their licence anyway...
Here's one
Steve Bennett-3 wrote:
..the -BY- part means you
have to attribute the source. So presumably you weren't in compliance
with their licence anyway...
My understanding is that attribution is covered by the public attributions
on this Wiki page:
Yes surely that is the situation - use the source tag when using something
other than gps.
I have accepted the ToC, TBH I really don't give a monkeys either way though
have something of a preference for PD as it keeps life simpler, and I believe
the small minority of OS OpenData I have
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Graham Stewart (GrahamS)
gra...@dalmuti.net wrote:
and that the source tag is certainly recommended, but not enforced.
There is no such thing as an enforced tag in OSM. If you choose not
to use a tag then that is your choice. Not using a source tag when
basing
Toby Murray-2 wrote:
There is no such thing as an enforced tag in OSM. If you choose not
to use a tag then that is your choice.
Enforced may have been a poor choice of word.
What I meant was that, as I understand it, there is no particular licensing
requirement that every node/way derived
2011/6/16 Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Graham Stewart (GrahamS)
gra...@dalmuti.net wrote:
and that the source tag is certainly recommended, but not enforced.
There is no such thing as an enforced tag in OSM. If you choose not
to use a tag then that is
On 16/06/2011 18:00, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
You can also put this information in the change-set-comment. IMHO this
is where this belongs to. AFAIK the source-tag is disputed and it is
recommended to use the changeset comments.
The problem with the changeset source tag is that there's no
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:50 PM, SomeoneElse
li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:
On 16/06/2011 18:00, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
You can also put this information in the change-set-comment. IMHO this
is where this belongs to. AFAIK the source-tag is disputed and it is
recommended to use the
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason avarab at gmail.com writes:
I've been away for a while. But it seems to me from reading the terms
that I can't say yes to them in good faith, not because I don't want
to, but because I remember I derived a few things from external
CC-BY-SA, and I can't now recall what they
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:00 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
You can also put this information in the change-set-comment. IMHO this
is where this belongs to. AFAIK the source-tag is disputed and it is
recommended to use the changeset comments.
Source is disputed? By whom?
2011/6/17 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:00 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
Source is disputed? By whom? I've never heard any dispute about it? I
put a source tag on every single object I create, and try and update
it when I modify it.
It is not completely useless but
Steve Bennett wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:00 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
You can also put this information in the change-set-comment. IMHO this
is where this belongs to. AFAIK the source-tag is disputed and it is
recommended to use the changeset comments.
Back in 2006 I wrote the following when it still wasn't clear what the
ODbL acceptance terms would be like:
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 22:10, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com wrote:
If someone presents me with a boolean Do you allow relicensing under
the ODbL I'll have to say no because
- Original Message -
From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com
To: OpenStreetMap blather talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:06 AM
Subject: [OSM-talk] Can I say yes to the ODbL if I can't account for
100%of my data?
Back in 2006 I wrote the following when
Exactly my own situation, except following poor advice I accepted the new
CT. Apparently it is not possible to change the CT status and my formal
request to have my suspect data deleted seems to have been ignored.
My recommendation is not to accept the CT, and reenter those items that you
did
If only there were a way to indicate the *source* of a given object...
This is obviously hindsight and doesn't help at this point in your
situation but seriously... The source=* tag: use it.
Toby
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 7:48 PM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:
Exactly my own
18 matches
Mail list logo
