sent from a phone
On 10. Aug 2019, at 11:27, Nuno Caldeira <nunocapelocalde...@gmail.com> wrote: >> can't they use more than one data source? >> Yes, i do agree. Sounds like a good argument to remove the 50% of the >> guideline. >> > Yes, i do agree. Sounds like a good argument to remove the 50% of the > guideline. > I believe the 50% rule is ok, if it refers to the displayed objects on the screen (although this can also be arbitrary, since you can always split a way, or interpolate nodes to get more of them). Imagine a map which chooses a different data provider per country. For zoomed in maps (you only see data from one provider) you would want this one provider prominently attributed. If you attribute to someone else more prominently and show the actual data provider only in „others“, you will inevitably create a wrong impression about the source, and if it’s us who miss out on visible attribution, we should care. For another perspective, imagine someone making a world map with 85% OpenStreetMap data and 15% XY inc. data, if someone looks on a part of this map which is fed by these 15% XY data, you would not want to have it incorrectly attributed to OpenStreetMap (although we are generally the principal data provider). It is crucial that the 50% relate to the actually visible map features, and not to the total map. If the latter was possible, you could just fill your db with random crap in the middle of the ocean and distort the proportion. What about maps that display an overlay over a basemap? This would lead to the overlay data provider mostly being pushed in the second row because it is quantitatively less, but the overlay data might be the rare unique data that is interesting. In case someone displayed an OpenStreetMap based overlay over a different background, why would we deliberately renounce from attribution in these cases? Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
