[OSM-talk] Attribution guideline update

[Simon Poole]

Folks, I was being a bit tongue in cheek, obviously the point didn't get
across. I apologize and re-state:

For many legal and marketing reasons providing attribution to "OSM" is
not something that is likely ever going to be supported or recommended
by the OSMF as sufficient.

This is nothing new and has nothing to do with the proposed guideline
outside of reducing the options.

Simon

Am 20.02.2020 um 00:44 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via talk:
>
>
>
> 19 Feb 2020, 21:05 by simon at poole.ch:
>
>
>     Am 19.02.2020 um 20:17 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via talk:
>>     19 Feb 2020, 17:22 by dieterdreist at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
>>
>>         But I stick to the comment that 500px are far too many (=1000
>>         actual retina pixels or 1500 px on a retina at 3). 
>>
>>     Yes, you may easily fit at least "© OSM"
>>     with link in such space.
>
>     Just that people don't get the wrong idea, using attributing to
>     OSM is completely out of the question, since when does Online
>     Soccer Manager distribute geo-data?
>
> Obviously, it is only ok when you are constrained 
> for space and there is actually no
> space for longer text.
>
> If you have let's say 450 pixels then you
> should use full name OpenStreetMap.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200220/15f5efe2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20200220/15f5efe2/attachment.sig>