[OSM-talk] Sourcing street names - what's the policy, and why?

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Tue Jan 5 04:13:49 GMT 2010


On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 10:12 PM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:

> What if my "system" is, map all the roads in a 200m radius, then look up
> the names, then repeat?
>

I'd say that certainly qualifies as systematic.  As to your other scenarios,
I'm not sure you gave enough information.

By non-systematic, I'm thinking more of someone who is using some other
sources for most of their data, and just checks here and there when there's
a question.  It might even be someone doing a physical survey, who can't
find a sign for one or two out of a hundred streets she surveys.


> One suggestion I made to Steve was to "Stick to the places that you're
>> interested in, and not only will you get the most benefit, but we'll get the
>> best maps."
>>
>
> With respect, I found this suggestion rather silly.
>

I figured you would.  But I stand by it.

Or hey, I'm "interested" in filling in white spaces.
>

I can provide you with plenty of white spaces which can be filled without
copying from copyrighted maps.  Come trace the hundreds of thousands of
lakes and ponds in my state.  Or add building outlines on every house in my
county.  Street names aren't very filling anyway.

And I fail to see how carrying out a pilgrimage to the street in question
> changes anything.
>

It certainly builds confidence that the names you're entering are correct.


> Are people seriously arguing that, having looked up the name of a street
> somewhere, I can't enter it in OSM, but if I drive all the way to the street
> and back, and *then* enter it, this is ok?
>

Yes.


> Does anyone really believe copyright law works this way?
>

No.  They're just afraid it might.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100104/ecbecae4/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list