Re: [Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

2017-12-23 Thread Craig Wallace
On 2017-12-23 19:13, Dave F wrote: Not an expert, but I'm surprised if that's true. Isn't BY attribution the same that OSM asks of map producers? I note Mapillary are also CC BY-SA Mapillary have given special permission, to allow using the images to contribute to OSM. This is a separate

Re: [Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

2017-12-23 Thread Craig Wallace
On 2017-12-22 21:41, Dave F wrote: Hi FYI user Yorvik Prestigitator has been tagging telephone boxes across Britain. He assumed some of these are working phones & tagged them as such, when they're purely ornamental (the ones in my city are recent additions & have flowers growing out of them at

Re: [Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

2017-12-23 Thread Andy Townsend
For info: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility most of the editors there have a reasonable history of discussing these things so there's a good chance they know what they're talking about (more so than me when it comes to licences, certainly) so I'd be tempted to

Re: [Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

2017-12-23 Thread David Woolley
On 23/12/17 19:13, Dave F wrote: Not an expert, but I'm surprised if that's true. Isn't BY attribution the same that OSM asks of map producers? I note Mapillary are also CC BY-SA For third party contributors, OSM only attributes a small number, like the Ordnance Survey. Third party

Re: [Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

2017-12-23 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Dave F wrote: > To double check - CC BY-SA 2.0 is compatible with OSM? It isn't, but in this case it doesn't matter: this is what's sometimes described as a "thin copyright". Reproducing the photograph itself is an act restricted by copyright, but deducing information from it isn't. (Of course,

Re: [Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

2017-12-23 Thread Dave F
Not an expert, but I'm surprised if that's true. Isn't BY attribution the same that OSM asks of map producers? I note Mapillary are also CC BY-SA DaveF On 22/12/2017 23:26, David Woolley wrote: On 22/12/17 22:32, Dave F wrote: To double check - CC BY-SA 2.0 is compatible with OSM? The

Re: [Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

2017-12-22 Thread David Woolley
On 22/12/17 22:32, Dave F wrote: To double check -  CC BY-SA 2.0 is compatible with OSM? The problem is going to be the BY part. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

2017-12-22 Thread Dave F
Just looked at one in my city: http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5565173 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5283204876/history This is one he tagged as a usable phone. He added the note after I queried his edits. So it looks like he didn't use Geograph. To double check - CC BY-SA 2.0 is

[Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

2017-12-22 Thread Dave F
Hi FYI user Yorvik Prestigitator has been tagging telephone boxes across Britain. He assumed some of these are working phones & tagged them as such, when they're purely ornamental (the ones in my city are recent additions & have flowers growing out of them at the moment). When asked for his