I'm interested in revisiting the issue of attaching links to photographs in OSM via tag.<div><br></div><div>There's an ancient stale proposal at:<br><a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Image" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Image</a><br>
But no hint of why the proposal was abandoned, or any of the points of debate.<div>There seems to be little "push" demand based for photos on taginfo:</div><div><br></div><div><div>---------</div></div><div>photo=(5)</div>
<div>image:flickr=(3)</div><div>flickr=(18)<br>image=(332)<br>wikipedia:image=(12)<br>wetap:photo=(108)<br>source:image=Yahoo (200) (useless)<br>
FG:photo=(529) (useless)</div><div><br></div><div>Open Street View and its mailing list kind of kick around: <a href="http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.photos">http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.photos</a></div>
<div>---------</div><div><br></div><div><div>I contributed the 108 "wetap:photo" nodes. roughly 25% of the total images links in OSM. You can view these as pink dots at <a href="http://www.wetap.org">http://www.wetap.org</a> ).</div>
</div><div><br></div><div>The downside issues seem similar to the website= tag, in that it could attract spam or inappropriate links.</div><div>The upside is that it can make for richer mapping. As URL links there is no server storage cost to the OSM project.</div>
</div><div>Where do photo links stand?</div>