[OSM-talk] collateral damage (was: What the license change is going to do to the map)

Hillsman, Edward hillsman at cutr.usf.edu
Thu Feb 10 13:10:17 GMT 2011


I have mapped in one of the affected areas. Some of my work there pre-dates Anthony's. He modified it, and I am guessing that this is why some of my work was also deleted. As an example, on September 5, 2009, I added Carrollwood Bicycle Emporium (484675555), a bicycle shop, to a shopping center. On October 12, Anthony added an address to this bicycle shop. The removal of his data yesterday  removed the shop completely, instead of simply taking it back to my original contribution (location, name, shop tag, but no address tags). If this is the way that the data removal will be handled for contributors who do not accept the new license, then it's going to cascade quite a bit farther than intended, and it is probably going to make a lot of contributors who DO accept the new license terms pretty unhappy. So, I would strongly encourage that any future deletions be handled with greater sensitivity than this one was.

I will go back and restore my work on this shop manually, but I wanted to bring this occurrence into the discussion before doing so. I haven't checked yet for what else was lost, but because my interest is in cycling, I immediately noticed the bicycle shop was missing.

Ed Hillsman


On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 12:26:46 -0500, Anthony <osm at inbox.org<mailto:osm at inbox.org>> wrote:

>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] What the license change is going to do to the map

>Message-ID:      <AANLkTinE3r+DJQoWWMkiQmHQOUofw9JERr1r3YUzSsON at mail.gmail.com<mailto:AANLkTinE3r+DJQoWWMkiQmHQOUofw9JERr1r3YUzSsON at mail.gmail.com>>

>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

>

>On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Al Haraka <alharaka at gmail.com<mailto:alharaka at gmail.com>> wrote:

>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org<mailto:osm at inbox.org>> wrote:

>>> http://www.sharedmap.org/bna.html

>>> http://www.sharedmap.org/before.PNG

>>> http://www.sharedmap.org/after.PNG

>>

>> I enjoy a thread that is well on its way to a flame war as much as the

>> next guy, but do you mind telling us the methodology used to achieve

>> this result? ?Last time it was discussed, there was a lot of debate on

>> how to properly tag a node, way, or relation as license compatible or

>> not because this is a multi-user system. ?I am curious: how did you

>> reach your conclusions?

>

>The board voted to delete my contributions, and this is the before and after.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20110210/c5bef42c/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list