[OSM-talk] License Change View on OSM

[Jo]

2011/12/13 Hillsman, Edward <hillsman at cutr.usf.edu>

> Let me get this straight. In the past, FormerMapper created a node or a
> way under the license as it stood. NewMapper, who has agreed to the new
> license terms, has modified the node or way by changing the alignment or
> location, or adding detail based on observation in the field—correcting
> what was incorrect, or adding information, but using the existing node or
> way record simply because it was there. FormerMapper has not accepted the
> new license (most likely because s/he is no longer active in OSM and cannot
> be reached—this is the case of a lot of the undergraduate students who have
> done some mapping here as parts of class projects). The modified nodes and
> ways in this case will be deleted, even though the information they contain
> is really now the product of NewMapper, with nothing really remaining of
> FormerMapper’s work except for a record number and some history of having
> created the record number and now-defunct content for it?****
>
> ** **
>
> I am NewMapper in the above scenario, and I am not happy about the
> prospect of losing a lot of the mapping I’ve done over the past two years,
> or of having to redraw a bunch of ways, or of having to recopy data that
> I’ve already entered (lots of opportunities for introducing errors). Is
> there going to be some option whereby I can vouch for my contributions and
> say that they are real and should be retained?****
>
>
> I'm sure you're not the only one who is unhappy about this, but the only
way to vouch for your work is by checking each node,way,relation
individually. Removing it when necessary and replacing it with a version
where no contributions of FormerMapper are present anymore. Unless you can
use other sources from which you can gather those bits of information. For
a street name, I suppose this could be the address information of a company
with an address on that street, provided this address was entered in OSM by
somebody who did agree to the license change.
For coordinates, bing can be used in most cases to place the nodes.

I have been doing this for several months now for all the edits I
performed, exactly because I didn't want my hard mapping work to be thrown
away at a (then) undefined time in the future.

Anyway, I see it as a way to improve the map. I find that I'm adding zebra
crossings and highway=give_way/stop while 'solving' license issues. I'm
also taking the opportunity to align all the other features on bing. So if
we all put our shoulders under it, this whole process could also mean that
the map will improve tremendously.

On the other hand, there is a region which I won't touch, as long as I was
the only one in Belgium doing this. A large area where a very active
FormerMapper doesn't agree to the license. I'll simply let it become
devastated by the license change and then we'll have to rebuild it (mostly)
from scratch. Given that the whole map as we have it now, was built from
scratch without aid from Bing at the time in just a few years, this is not
something we can't overcome. In that regard I'm glad a date has finally
been set for phase 5. As far as I'm concerned, this whole thing being drawn
out over several years is somewhat annoying. But I understand why it needs
to done like that, no real issues there either.

Cheers,

And happy mapping. Simply check the license for everything you touch and it
won't end up in the /dev/null trash can.

Jo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20111213/87cc6288/attachment.html>