I had to read the 2013 (wow!) thread again. '(c)OSM' on small devices would have legal issues as well, I guess, but maybe not as many. Anyway, speaking of legal issues, I don't think this is like if we ever took a lot of legal actions concerning attribution... Yves
Le 10 juin 2019 21:56:14 GMT+02:00, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> a écrit : > >Am 10.06.2019 um 21:05 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier: >> On 6/10/19 5:28 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:47 PM Yves <yve...@mailbox.org >>> <mailto:yve...@mailbox.org>> wrote: >>> >>> I think a small '(c)OSM' for small screen web or app could be >>> suggested as OK, what do you think? >>> >>> >>> Why not revive this dormant proposal for a small attribution logo >>> that was proposed 6 years >>> ago:https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RFC_Attribution_Mark >>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RFC_Attribution_Mark> >> I have always wondered why it did not get more attention... > >Because of legal issues with both the proposed logo and using it as a >replacement for "OpenStreetMap" for attribution purposes that have been >mentioned more than once (it should be noted by the way that neither >the >goog or Mapbox use anything else than their full name for attribution). > >Simon > >> But I'm not the target audience. So, do we have feedback from web >> designers - the population who this proposal aims to convince to >> attribute properly ? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
