[OSM-talk] Please review "Community attribution advice” wiki page

Christoph Hormann osm at imagico.de
Tue Dec 8 18:24:24 UTC 2020



> Rory McCann <rory at technomancy.org> hat am 08.12.2020 18:41 geschrieben:
>  
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, at 09:43, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote:
> > Can you give an example of something that would follow
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Community_attribution_advice
> > and still would not fulfill ODBL?
> 
> What is and isn't allowed by the ODbL can (I think) only be answered by a court case.

I take that as a no - rendering your original claim:

> There are many examples of poor attribution where someone could argue that they meet this standard.

unsubstantiated.

> These guidelines suffer the same mistake as the old OSMF Legal FAQ¹ of using “should”, rather than “must”.

The original formulation of the advice used 'should' exactly two times - and in a context where it means indeed 'should' as per RFC2119, that is in so far as attribution *should* be specific to what OSM data is used for in case a map uses multiple data sources.  There is no community consensus that this is more than a strong recommendation.

BTW - the OSMF organized editing guidelines:

https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

use the term 'should' 18 times.

... Wer im Glashaus sitzt, sollte nicht mit Steinen werfen.

-- 
Christoph Hormann 
http://www.imagico.de/



More information about the talk mailing list