[OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status update

James james2432 at gmail.com
Sun Sep 8 10:27:59 UTC 2019


Can confirm roads, buildings, parks are from OSM from a little bit more
than a year ago.

Not sure what the other sources contributed

On Sun., Sep. 8, 2019, 6:17 a.m. Nuno Caldeira, <
nunocapelocaldeira at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Here's another example of why we should not adopt the multiple sources
> attribution omission of our attribution. They list us as partners (?)
> https://www.wrld3d.com/3d-maps/custom-maps
> Use multiple sources and are not complying with ODbL by not showing the
> license.
> Seen multiple maps by their clients and they show data "copyright l.map"
>
> I have confirmed with multiple contributors that largely the data used is
> OSM and it's around a year old dump of the planet.
>
> Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> escreveu em sex, 9/08/2019 às 08:45 :
>
>> As we've mentioned multiple times over the last months, the LWG decided
>> last year to consolidate all attribution guidance in to one document and
>> address some of the use cases that have become common over the last 7
>> years that previously had none. Particularly in the light of the
>> parallel discussions about attribution on larger social media platforms
>> we need to make up our minds what we actually want, and define concrete
>> minimum requirements for acceptable attribution. To not do this just
>> provides the excuse of pointing to the cacophony of voices all saying
>> something different.
>>
>> We've been working on and off on the document for a while, and are now
>> largely finished. Going forward we intend to wikify the document and
>> make it available for public comment together with a BoF session at SotM
>> next month (which probably means that we'll have to appropriate a coffee
>> break). You can have a glimpse at the text here
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e_IQYHtqVivGRw4O4EOn6__-LGMuzPlWz6XKEdAkwW0/edit?usp=sharing
>> the few things that are not nailed down belong to those that we would
>> appreciate feedback on.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> PS: the number of coffee breaks permitting we might want to appropriate
>> another one for the discussion of a tile licence change.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20190908/cc658a06/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list