Freimut,
it would be nice if you could at least sign your name *somewhere* in
your emails.
This list (rebuild@) is dedicated to the rather technical side of how to
get from our current database to an ODbL clean database once it is clear
what data can be kept and what cannot.
Any discussion about the process that should come *before* that - i.e.
any discussion about how to determine what is kept and what isn't, whom
to contact, what significance your 80% number has, how to determine the
right time to actually execute the license change, and so on - falls in
the realm of legal-talk, where I'm full-quoting your message to.
Bye
Frederik
On 02/13/2012 10:28 PM, fk270...@fantasymail.de wrote:
Only six weeks are left before the scheduled license change on April 1st. There
are still too many open issues:
- checking imports (e.g. h4ck3rm1k3) which is rather an administrative than a
political issue
- only 80% of worldwide mappers have agreed so far, despite a tremendous
mailing effort
- checking invalid e-mails?
- sending paper letters to ~200 non-responding real-name mappers?
- enabling self adoption of anonymous edits and second accounts?
- How to deal with group accounts like mapping parties or schools with multiple
authors?
- How to deal with guest and test accounts?
- How to deal with short-time mappers who did not reach the level of database
protection?
- How to deal with low-quality first-time mappers whose contributions can
easily be removed?
- How to deal with armchair mappers who (are supposed to) have copied from
official maps?
- How to deal with deceased mappers?
- How to deal with forks that are ODbL-compatible, e.g. Commonmap?
- How to deal with split ways?
- How to replace ways that have been manufactured by decliners or
non-responders and later modified by active mappers? In some cases, the current
ownership attribution of split ways is simply fraud.
As mentioned above, there are some special cases which can be rebuilt without any data
loss, e.g. if the first editor has manufactured an empty way. I have seen many
low-quality edits perfectly suited for silent rebuilding in the first stage. Gradual
rebuild of "clean" ways would increase confidence among those who have declined
for pollitical reasons. However, a sudden data loss makes many mappers more angry and
drives them off :-(
Based on historical experience, each of these issues will take at least one LWG
session.
As the OSMI inspector still contains many errors, it would be a good idea if
any mapper was able to report typical license problems to a bug system (and not
to the press nor to the court).
Remapping is another activity that cannot be done neither in six weeks nor in
six months. Remapping according to high ethical standards (local survey in the
outback) requires some coordination. E.g. a bug tracking system like
OpenStreetBugs to identify neighborhoods that need to be remapped on the ground.
It would make sense to handle both license and remapping issues within the same
bug tracking system.
a) remapping required (e.g. adding maxspeed, surface)
b) license problem (e.g. decliner has imported from a clean source)
c) license and remapping problem: armchair mapper has redrawn the way that
still needs to be verified by local survey. These bugs need to be confirmed
twice.
There are too many open issues which cannot be solved within few weeks (only if
the LWG meets every weekday until April 1st).
However, I would be happy if the LWG seriously pursued rather a clean than a
quick license change. If anybody involved has already booked his vacation after
April 1st, we may continue in May to pursue a clean license change.
Cheers
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
