[talk-au] tagging the source of edits

[John Smith]

On 29 July 2010 01:43, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> 1) Change the tag to source=nearmap: that's misattributing any parts
> of the way that you didn't update
> 2) Change the tag to source=yahoo;nearmap: tedious, but relatively accurate
> 3) Add source tags to the individual nodes that you moved: I often do
> this, but it's probably causing database bloat
> 4) Add source tags just to the changeset: IMHO this is insufficient,
> as it requires enormous effort later to retrieve changeset information
> and match it against ways, or vice versa.

5) Split the way and tag the bits actually changed, but suffers a
similar fate as tagging nodes in terms of unnessecary bloat...


> It's hard to say exactly at what point a way is no longer "sourced"
> from yahoo. What if hypothetically, the surface information came from
> yahoo, but the locations came from nearmap? It's tricky.

If you wanted to do this accurate, you'd tag each individual source:

source:location=nearmap
source:surface=yahoo
source:name=survey

but human nature is inherently lazy, why do all that when
source=nearmap more or less imparts the same information? :)

> I would love to know whether Yahoo or Nearmap actually gives a damn.

No idea about Yahoo, they only seem to have limited adoption of OSM
map data in the form of some very out of date flickr tiles in some
select location, maybe they were going to use more data but haven't
gotten round to it?

As for Nearmap, that is a curious situation in and of itself, on one
hand you can only release data under a share alike license, primarily
so they can have access to the data if they want, but they don't
require attribution.