[OSM-talk] odbl=clean usage

Nathan Edgars II neroute2 at gmail.com
Sun Jan 15 12:34:23 GMT 2012

Since there's been no response, I plan to start doing this.

On 1/13/2012 6:49 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> It's my view that odbl=clean is essentially a loophole - that is, if the
> OSMF actually pays attention to it when mass-reverting. But given that
> it seems to be accepted, I'm wondering about the following case:
> A non-agreeing mapper changes a bunch of roads from residential to
> secondary, using essentially an algorithmic approach (a certain subset
> of the state highway system).
> Several years later, I go through and create relations for these routes,
> as well as demoting some of the less-major ones to tertiary.
> If the mass-revert were to go forward now, those that I changed would
> remain tertiary, while those I didn't would go back to residential (as
> imported from TIGER). This is obviously not an ideal state of affairs.
> So my question is whether this would be an appropriate usage of
> odbl=clean. In other words, if that mapper had not changed it from
> residential to secondary, would I have done the same? If so, can I add
> the tag?
> (Apologies if this belongs in tagging, since it's about use of a tag.)

More information about the talk mailing list