[OSM-talk] google wms

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Thu Dec 25 10:47:47 GMT 2008


Simon Ward wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 01:22:22AM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>>> A possible consideration for a future API is to move the check there:
>>> JOSM uploads, and indicates what data sources were used in the editing
>>> session.  Server checks, sees GoogleWMS, replies “I’m sorry Dave, I’m
>>> afraid I can’t do that.”
>> And slap some control freak crypto onto that so that nobody can 
>> circumvent it?
> And you missed the point of it in almost exactly the same way Pieren
> did.

Might be an indication of a point not made clear enough.

I might have over-reacted but I am very sensitive in this department. We 
have this cool, free, open project and still every now and then I sense 
a desire with people to exert control, to make sure nobody behaves 
against the rules even if this comes at the expense of infringing 
freedom and implementing a "guilty until proven innocent" principle. 
Your posting in particular did not lend itself to this conclusion but 
there have been others in the past that actually reminded me of numerous 
political rebels of history who fought for liberation from autocratic 
rule and ended up being the most inhuman dictators themselves.

Your posting at least suggested that JOSM should, by default, tell the 
server something about how the user arrived at whatever he's uploading. 
I do support this in principle; I have already suggested setting a 
"source" tag for the changegroup based on what WMS images were displayed 
in the background - but this will, of course, always happen in a way 
where the user can see and modify this information before it gets 
transmitted to the server. The "Google WMS" discussed here would show up 
under whatever name was specified by the user when s/he added it to the 
WMS menu, and it would thus be very difficult to implement a server 
"check" for this.

Especially as this would be another move to try and take responsibility 
away from the user: "Hey, the OSM server didn't complain when I hit 
upload, so it must have been ok!" - I am very muc hin favour of grown-up 
users and a system that relies on them, rather than a system that 
assumes nobody can be trusted because they're either malevolent or 


More information about the talk mailing list