[OSM-talk] RFC - OSM contributor mark

Jeff Meyer jeff at gwhat.org
Wed Jan 16 20:47:27 GMT 2013


Isn't the purpose of "OSM and Contributors" to "credit" or "attribute" the
source of the map tile data?

e.g. if FourSquare puts the OSM mark on their maps, they aren't showing
that OSM has contributed to the 4sq map, they are attributing the source of
their tiles to OSM.

The fact that it links to, or mentions, OSM contributors isn't what this
statement or mark is about.
No one would call "(c) Google.com" a "contributor" mark.

The fact that we elect to require reference to Contributors in our credits
or to discuss Contributors on our copyright is something we choose to do
because, well, because OSM rocks.

My elaborate 2 cents...

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Tom Hughes <tom at compton.nu> wrote:

> On 16/01/13 19:08, Alex Barth wrote:
>
>  ## Terminology: "Contributor mark" vs e. g. "Attribution mark"
>>
>> Some have pointed out that 'attribution mark' might be a more accurate
>> name. That might be, I don't want to change up at the moment but definitely
>> a discussion to be had if ever we use this term more "officially" on
>> openstreetmap.org.
>>
>
> I think the problem is that you are already locking in the terminology by
> using "contributors" in the URL of the landing page.
>
> In fact that's my main problem with the terminology - the proposed content
> is not at all what I would expect to see on a page with that URL as the URL
> suggests some sort of list of contributors.
>
>
>  ## Design
>>
>> There were comments on the design being heavy on pictures and not using
>> the current OpenStreetMap.org template. I'm thinking these are good things.
>> With adjustments, I'd love to keep it this way. The pictures help us
>> communicate that OSM is created by many many, many individuals, the full
>> screen page allows us to focus the message. And yes, there is scrolling
>> before hitting the links. This is good as we'll want to have the space for
>> a couple of points to get across before people jump off. It's not the case
>> that we've got great introductory properties to link to right now :) In the
>> future this could change: E. g. as soon as we have great introductory
>> material we could link this more prominently "Get started mapping" above
>> the fold. Or we could come up with a variation of the page that offers a
>> link into an editor placing you right where you left the map.
>>
>> That said, we should work on taking a stronger queue from the overall
>> osm.org appearance to link this ad stronger to OpenStreetMap:
>>
>> https://github.com/**openstreetmap/openstreetmap-**
>> website/pull/180#issuecomment-**12333532<https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/180#issuecomment-12333532>
>>
>
> The scrolling itself is not the problem so much as the lack of visual cues
> that you can scroll - as I said on IRC it was only after you started
> talking about a link that I couldn't see that I realised there was anything
> "below the fold" as the giant picture had made it look like a fixed page.
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
> http://compton.nu/
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk>
>



-- 
Jeff Meyer
Global World History Atlas
www.gwhat.org
jeff at gwhat.org
206-676-2347
<http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jeffmeyer> osm: Historical
OSM<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Historical_OSM>
 / my OSM user page <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jeffmeyer>
 t: @GWHAThistory <https://twitter.com/GWHAThistory>
 f: GWHAThistory <https://www.facebook.com/GWHAThistory>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130116/20ca4800/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list