[talk-au] How many NearMap users do you think have accepted the new CTs and ODbL?

[David Murn]

On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 12:40 +0800, Andrew Gregory wrote:


> > Unless youve realigned the ways based on GPS tracks after you traced
> > from nearmap, tagging the ways as source=survey is incorrect.  You
> > can add a source:name=survey or similar, but if youve traced from a
> > source, just because you verify it with another source if you havent
> > made any changes Id suggest leaving source tag as is.
> 
> 
> Yes, it's all based on surveys where I've gone there in person. (How
> else would I get the name?)

As I said, when you get the name, you should use source:name=survey and
leave the source=nearmap tag in-place unless after you survey you not
only enter the name but also realign all the nearmap-sourced nodes to
your GPS trace.


> I just can't see that happening. The damage to the map would be too
> big! In any case, how do you select the people whose data is to be
> deleted? The same list of unacceptable sources that is too hard to
> determine in the first place? Whatever criteria that would be required
> to identify users could just as easily be applied to ways and nodes,
> in a much more targeted and far less damaging way.

Youve basically summarised the whole problem here.  The damage to the
map is significant (figures range from between 50-80% loss of data in
Australia).

The method being used to select the data to delete is to ask users to
allow OSM to relicence their contributions.  Anyone who doesnt agree,
has their data deleted.  This also affects any revisions made to
existing data by users who HAVE agreed.

The 'unacceptable sources' isnt so much a pre-determined list, in
general in Australia it is any data that is released under CC-BY or
CC-BY-SA, which will soon be incompatible with the new licence that OSMF
has drafted.

One of the problems is that its not easy to determine which users are
affected.  Some data is obviously tagged as being sourced from
somewhere, in these cases its easy to know if the data can remain or not
under the new licence.  But in Australia, a lot of users would have made
edits (even minor edits) using CC-BY sources, such as the ABS data or
simply using nearmap for a quick live edit on the OSM website, moving a
toilet to the correct location without adding a source tag, for
example.  

> Well source=nearmap is easily identified by an automated process. It
> worked for you! As for ones I may have missed, well I will need to be
> trusted that I haven't missed any, in exactly the same way the other
> 3390-536=2854 users will have to be trusted that they've never used
> nearmap.

My simple test was simply to demonstrate that a minimum of 25% of those
who agreed are unable to.  That figure might be higher, but it can be
guaranteed that its not lower.  The figures of 3390, 536 and 2854
represent total number of Australian mappers, total that have accepted
and total that havent.  This means that 2854 users' data wont be
included in the 'new' OSM as OSM cannot relicence the data from the
contributor.

David