[OSM-talk-ie] Over-zealous rejection of sources by editors
Killyfole and District Development Assocation
webmaster at killyfole.org.uk
Thu Mar 27 20:49:10 UTC 2014
I appreciate that you have put in a lot of work adding these notes to OSM and your motivation
is to help improve it. The reason a lot of us are so over-zealous is because we have also
dedicated a lot of time and effort into improving the map from sources which are not
prohibited. Many people go out and survey the area, noting down road names, numbers,
location of speed zones etc to be sure that they are not breaching any copyright.
The mere fact that it had to be confirmed via Google, OSi rings alarm bells for me. If you know
the road is called "X road" why do you need to confirm it? It would be much easier to use
Google Streetview and read the streetnames/numbers from that, but like it or not, its
breaching copyright and we want to keep the map free of any licensed/copyrighted material
or derived from a copyrighted source.
Also, the fact it was submitted anonymously, made me question the sources as well. Your
notes have generated quite a stir with local mappers (myself included) and have made me
question a few things, for example, your note http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/140503 In
it you "jogged" my memory and made me remember that it is actually called Monaghan Road. I
opened JOSM to make the fix and that jogged my memory into the location of other features
missing from the map!
My suggestion to you is that you create an account with OSM, and without using OSi or Google
add the suggestions to the map. ie From reading x resource I think/assume this road is called
"X Road". This then will help other mappers who might be able to verify the fact via local
knowledge. Sometimes it just takes a nudge for someone to remember!!
I hope you don't think we are having a go, or attacking you personally. We are quite a friendly
bunch really! You should come along to the Ireland OSM IRC channel and have a chat.
pick a username and join channel #osm-ie It can be quiet, so don’t think you are being ignored.
I hope to see you more of you on this list and maybe in the chat room,
On Thursday 27 March 2014 17:18:59 Colm Moore wrote:
> As background, I am editing the Road Traffic (Special Speed Limits)(County
> Monaghan) Bye-Laws, 2014. I may sound angry in this email, but please take
> it as frustration and confusion.
> Over the last day I have added notes to various roads around County
> Monaghan, several of which have been rejected on over-zealous "Sources
> Prohibited " grounds.
> For example:
> Resolved note #140906
> "Clones Road (National Road N54)" according to Road Traffic (Special Speed
> Limits)(County Monaghan) Bye-Laws, 2014
> **Confirmed** by OSi, Google, Bing, NTA JP
> Created by anonymous 23 minutes ago
> Resolved by 12element 21 minutes ago
> This note includes comments from anonymous users which should be
> independently verified.
> Resolved by 12element 21 minutes ago
> Sources Prohibited.
> Both the council and Department of Transport refer to it as "Clones Road"
> and it indeed it goes to Clones.
> S.I. No. 53/2012 - Roads Act 1993 (Classification of National Roads)
> Order 2012 http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2012/en/si/0053.html places
> Clones Road west of Market Road and east of Mullaghadun and
> Why are separate council and governmental sources, available under the
> European Communities (Re-Use of Public Sector Information) Regulations 2005
> (SI 279 of 2005) referred to as "Sources Prohibited"?
> I have only used OSi, Google, Bing, NTA JP as confirmation - not original
> sources. NTA JP actually misspells it as "Clones Raod" at one point, but
> you get the idea. :) Even if I only used OSi, Google, Bing, NTA JP as
> original sources, surely that is 'genuine' research', not plagiarism.
> If everybody is calling it "Clones Road" it just might be "Clones Road", but
> the attitude seems to be walk like a duck, talk like a duck ... oh, no you
> can only call if **Anas platyrhynchos**, not a duck. :(
More information about the Talk-ie