On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 4:53 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I'm slightly confused by all this talk about needing contractual
> agreements with all the end users and the OSM-F, or needing to
> identify Nearmap users to OSM-F.
>
> OSM already has data in the database from other projects, which was
> community sourced and licensed under various cc-by style licenses,
> sure it was bulk imported, possibly only once, and the only difference
> here is Nearmap will be bulk importing in real time, frankly they
> should be applauded for taking a pro-active approach to try to deal
> with faulty data themselves, rather than leaving it up to the OSM
> community to deal with it later like other bulk imports have.
>
>
I think the point that Frederik was trying to make was that this model
("bulk imported in real time") is not ideal. Ideally, we want the users
interacting directly with the OSM API rather than going through some
intermediary service.
We want this for at least two reasons:
1) So we can follow our standard procedure for blocking users that perform
unwanted edits (whether they be vandals, inappropriate imports, or unusable
sources).
2) So we can communicate with the end mapper (regarding license changes,
community events, etc.).
OAuth was implemented for exactly this purpose. The user creates an account
on OSM.org, NearMap's client authenticates with OAuth, and the user can make
edits. It sounds like NearMap has an issue with sending the user off to
OSM.org to generate a user account and trying to draw them back in to
complete the OAuth process.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
