[OSM-legal-talk] ODbL implementation plan - extra phase proposal

"Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" xificurk at gmail.com
Sat Jan 28 15:14:47 GMT 2012

Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Or, in other words, do you have reason to believe that a three-month
> "only edits to non-tainted objects accepted" phase would actually make
> people re-map more and better compared to the phase we are in now? And
> if so, why?

Can we agree on the fact, that some of the recent edits are done on
tainted objects that will go away in the final cut-off (together with
those fresh edits)?
I don't know all the reasons why people do these kind of edits,
presumable they don't know that the object is tainted (and that it means
their work is deemed to be deleted in the final cut-off), or they simply
refuse to believe that OSMF will delete so much data in their region.
And even if you know about this stuff, it's not always easy to exactly
identify the problematic objects and be really sure that your edit will
survive the cut-off. Furthermore the identification of problems requires
certain amount of human work, which seems quite irrational - why should
we waste precious human time for something that will be done
algorithmically by machines in the end anyway?

The extra phase would tell all of the contributors trying to edit
tainted objects something like: look, this data will soon go away
together with your current work, so either try to remap it to a
compliant state, or don't bother at all.
It will bring more articulate warning to contributors in problematic
regions and the rest can be at least really sure that their work won't
be for nothing. It's definitely better than a user going to bed one day
with a good feeling about their recent edits and waking up the next
morning seeing them gone.

In some regions people will be upset about not being able to do simple
edits, but I still think it's a better solution then the alternative.

Best regards,
Petr Morávek aka Xificurk

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20120128/06addc64/attachment.pgp>

More information about the legal-talk mailing list