> *and where those contributions have since been superceded or "washed > out" by subsequent changes*"
I think people understand this is important, but the wording is so vague and examples of appropriate usage given on the list vary wildly. The example you gave still allows for IP to be present in the history of the node... *shrug* To try and clear things up, for myself at least, can I get comment on some contrived examples of practice I have used and I've seen used by others? All non-odbl nodes in the examples below are deleted or no longer existed. Most ways I've come across no longer have any positional IP from the original creator. When commenting, please do explain why they differ from accepted practice. == A == Way V1: railway=rail Way Vn: railway=rail electrified = contact_line frequency = 50 gauge = 1435 passenger = yes source:electrified = observation tracks = 4 usage = main voltage = 25000 + odbl=clean - presence of railway checked against recent Bing and OS == B == V1: highway=residential name=Garden Street Vn: highway=residental name=Garden Street maxspeed=20 mph - name=Garden Street + name=Garden Street source:name=OS_OpenData_StreetView odbl=clean - 'notional' deletion of name attribute and re-naming with StreetView or Locator sources == C == V1: highway=primary ref=A38 Vn: highway=trunk ref=A27 name=Oxford By-pass source:ref=OS_OpenData_StreetView + odbl=clean - IP exists in history but all attributes over-written If someone rejects all those uses, then basically every odbl tag I've added is incorrect and all those I've happened upon as well. My next request will be for an admin to revert about 100 changesets *weeps* This will be all the more annoying because I thought I was being careful; I read the documentation, read examples from multiple posters, looked at the history of every way I touched, and actually spent quite a bit of time re-mapping many ways I came across. Cheers, Craig On 23 March 2012 13:14, Andy Allan <[email protected]> wrote: > On 23 March 2012 12:58, Nick Whitelegg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Incidentally, is just "knowing the footpaths" evidence enough to tag with >> "odbl=clean"? Or is there the risk that the footpath was created with "iffy" >> sources? > > "Use odbl=clean to clear features which contain historic contributions > from people who have not agreed to the new contributor terms [...] > *and where those contributions have since been superceded or "washed > out" by subsequent changes*" > > Emphasis mine. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:odbl%3Dclean > > So if there's a path, and it's not clean, you can't just "clean it" by > adding the tag - that's not what the tag is for. It means that > absolutely no trace of the original IP remains in the current version, > and you've checked there's no residual IP. An example would be a node > tagged "amenity = pub", that happens to have been moved, the tag > removed, and incorporated into the middle of a road junction. > > Of course, I've been advising people from the beginning to avoid the > tag in the first place. Since so many people are misunderstanding it, > and accidentally misusing it, it has become meaningless. Therefore I > don't see how it can be relied upon during the license change, and if > it can't be used with confidence, there's even less point in tagging > anything with it. > >> I ask as I am intending to do some remapping of Andy Street's paths in the >> Bishops Waltham/Meon Valley area and wondering whether I have to actually >> walk the paths again or just tag with "odbl=clean" > > You don't have to walk the path if you can map it using other > techniques, such as GPS traces, Bing, OOC maps etc. Especially if you > know the path well enough to know how it goes (e.g. it's straight > through a particular patch of woods) then just remap it remotely. > > Cheers, > Andy > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
