[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - image=http://example.com/image_license_page

Bryce Nesbitt bryce2 at obviously.com
Tue Jul 2 17:17:36 UTC 2013


On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Tobias Knerr <osm at tobias-knerr.de> wrote:

> * I feel that it should be stated that *only* images under a free
> license should be linked, i.e. images that offer the same freedoms as
> OpenStreetMap data.
>

The license of both images and the OSM database may evolve or change from
time to time.
I feel it is up to the agent using the image to determine compatibility.
Different agents
may have different restrictions or abilities on what they are willing to
show.  By
specifying that it be possible to determine the license, each agent can
then decide what to show.


While this is an attempt to address the license problem, it is only
> loosely related. Image description pages may not actually be
> machine-readable. On the other had, some sites may indeed offer
> machine-readable data, but through different means (an API, normalized
> EXIF data, or simply by applying the same license to all images hosted
> on the site).
>

As I understand it:
The German historical map solves this by parsing the specific wikimedia
commons format.
If it does not recognize the format, it won't show the image.

While this puts the burden on the display agent, the agent needs to do that
anyway.  As OSM tags
are free-form, a mapper may put an incompatible link in at any time,  By
verifying the license at
the source, the chances of getting it right are maximized.  As standards
evolve for tagging license
of images, the agents can evolve to match.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20130702/38b179c4/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list