On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 01:27:49PM +0100, SomeoneElse wrote: > On 15/06/2011 11:57, Dave F. wrote: > >On 13/06/2011 19:13, Renaud MICHEL wrote: > >>Of course it could be used to do so. > >>Without it, if there is strong suspicion that a user copied unauthorized > >>data, then all that user contributions will be deleted. > > > > The original request was from a user of OSM data - as I understand > it they're trying to see how the map involves and what sources are > used to do that (GPS traces, aerial imagery such as Bing, > out-of-copyright maps, etc.). > > Personally, I'd encourage all mappers (newbies or otherwise) to use > "source" fields (e.g. "source=Bing", "source:name=survey") more than > they are currently used at the moment, because it helps future > mappers understand where previous data came from and how best to > merge their new data with it. > > I wouldn't assume that, simply because something has been added > without a source tag it's necessarily due to a user uploading data > that they don't have a right to. As Bernard Ingham said, it's more > likely to be cock-up than conspiracy.
Well, nearly all my contributions have no source tag. My assumption when I joined was that all mapping was assumed to be from some form of personal survey, usually gps, unless indicated otherwise. When I noticed the source tag, I assumed that its primary use was to acknowledge some 3rd party, but legal, source. It seemed silly and redundant to add an extra tag for gps survey which I took to be the default. Surely I am not the only one who interpreted things this way? So far as I recall, when I looked at other people's contributions in my area, I seldom saw a source tag. That reinforced my assumption. ael _______________________________________________ newbies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
