[talk-au] Edits vs edits

Richard Weait richard at weait.com
Sat Aug 14 23:15:34 BST 2010


On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 5:55 AM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12 August 2010 22:22, Grant Slater <openstreetmap at firefishy.com> wrote:
>> Sorry, my abuse reply was to the hypothetical question.
>>
>> But the un-winding of edits still stands.
>
> What about abusive edits that tweak the location of nodes by 0.1mm by
> someone pro-CT/ODBL just so they can claim the node was their
> creation?

Are you suggesting that such a bulk edit has happened?   I'm not aware
of edits that match that description perhaps you can link to the
changesets for reference?

Presuming that regular mapper, A_Mapper surveys and uploads their
neighbourhood, Mapperton, then other mapper, O_Mapper shifts
everything by a random 0.1mm, a superficial look at the current data
would show that O_Mapper touched all the data last.  A look at
node/way history would show that A_Mapper created version 1 of that
data.

Given the example above, and presuming that A_Mapper chose to accept
the license upgrade and O_Mapper did not, what would you recommend for
the data?

a) leave as version 2
b) revert to version 1
c) delete data
d) something  else.

What about the reverse?  What would you recommend be done with the
data if A_Mapper did not accept the license upgrade, but O_Mapper did
accept?

There is a thread on osm-dev@ discussing how to model OSM data
regarding ODbL/CT acceptance.  What you describe above sounds a little
different than the current discussion on osm-dev@, what would you call
it?  "edits vs. trivial edits", "user edits vs. automated edits" ?



More information about the Talk-au mailing list