[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Are we strict enough with imports ?
rob at robmyers.org
Thu Feb 11 14:37:00 GMT 2010
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:19:38 +0100, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>
> Jean-Guilhem Cailton wrote:
>> Ok, but please do not forget that in crisis situations (e.g. Haiti),
>> there could be people dying while the "deliberation" would be taking
And conversely there could be problems if OSM gets into trouble over bad
data accepted in haste and has to take out a section of the map while it
unpicks the contamination.
> This is something to be discussed later, I guess, but my take is that we
> should separate "crisis stuff" from the rest of OSM, to the point of
> having separate databases. We'd still use the normal OSM tools but there
> would be a special API server for a crisis region. There, people could
> do whatever they please (even more so than in "normal OSM") without
> interference from others. After the crisis has subsided, temporary
> structures removed and so on, work could then start on moving selected
> items from the "crisis map" over into the normal OSM map.
Yes that sounds like a very good way of firewalling concerns. The "crisis"
map becomes a "staging" OSM dataset to use web development jargon, or a
source of contributions back "upstream" to use Linux distro jargon.
> Being able to provide value in humanitarian crises is a side-effect of a
> healthy OSM - not a core purpose of OSM.
Yes this is a very important point. If OSM is functioning well, all sorts
of things become possible. If OSM's health is compromised because of
hurried responses to "ticking bomb" scenarios, all those things may suffer.
(I would send this to talk but I'm not on talk...)
More information about the legal-talk