[Osmf-talk] Questions regarding LWG work

[Christoph Hormann]

I was just looking over the newly published minutes of the December LWG
meeting and the January LWG meeting agenda and have a few questions
regarding them:

* why is the draft for the budget visible to me while the attribution
guideline draft is not?

* may we see the "six text options for multiple attribution text"
mentioned in the minutes and if not why not?  Or more generally:  May
we see the edit history of the attribution guideline draft instead of
just a number of snaphots without an edit history.

* The minutes indicate the plan to provide a legal statement w.r.t. a
specific use case (Inquiry from Uni Heidelberg).  Does the board
consider that to be within the scope of the LWG?  Does the board
consider legal assessments given by the LWG to individual data users to
be binding for the OSMF (like that a statement that a certain use case
is a produced work preventing the OSMF from taking legal actions
against the data user due to a different interpretation of said use
case)?

* I have no idea what the agenda items for the January meeting "Produced
work", "Osm.org Tile licence" and "Twitter attribution thread" mean.
Could someone from the LWG please reformulate those in a way that
allows ordinary OSMF members to actually understand what is going to be
discussed in the meeting (assuming that is the purpose of having an
agenda for the meeting of course).

* Is having a Google account a requirement for being a member of the
LWG?

More generally speaking regarding transparency of OSMF work - what would
people here think of introducing the established practice and policy we
now have for OSMF board meetings (that they are generally public and
closing parts of them requires a specific reason being provided for the
agenda items that are closed) also for working group meetings?  I think
this would be both helpful for transparency and for recruiting new
volunteers.  IMO the public board meetings can largely be considered to
have a positive effect of the engagement of the OSM community with the
board and the board's work and a similar effect could be achieved by
doing the same for the working groups.

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/