[Qgis-user] International/Local Labeled World Basemap in QGIS. Protomaps?

[Greg Troxel]

Richard Duivenvoorde <rdmailings at duif.net> writes:

>>    I am unclear on how we are dealing with the required OSM attribution
>>    in qgis.  I have added OSM tiles with quickosm, and the main map view
>>    lacks attribution.  I did publish a pdf map of local conservation, and
>>    I was careful in the map composer to attribute OSM (required) and
>>    MassGIS (polite).  I suspect at least some are not so careful.
>>    Leaflet has a default or at least more in-the-groove attribution path,
>>    and I think adding OSM to qgis should too.   This is not specifically
>>    about this vs TMS, but if starting from scratch I think we should
>>    significantly try.
>
> Agreed, but I do not have a solution for that either. Not sure if QGIS
> should enforce this or it is actually the responsibility of the
> producer of a map.

It is certainly the responsibility of anyone who uses OSM data and
shares it.

There are multiple options for qgis/plugins, at least:

  1) add OSM data, don't tell the user that there is a license, and don't
  add any attribution by default

  2) when adding the data, automatically add an attribution object so
  the canvas shows it, like the editor layer index support in JOSM.  Do
  something perhaps similar in print composer.  This might be creating
  an attribution decoration in a map view.  Another example is leaflet,
  where example code tends to look like the following, which shows the
  tooling support for attribution.

     var osmUrl = 'https://{s}.tile.openstreetmap.org/{z}/{x}/{y}.png',
         osmAttrib = '© <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright">OpenStreetMap</a> contributors',
         osm = L.tileLayer(osmUrl, {maxZoom: 19, attribution: osmAttrib});


  3) Like 2, but (unless you change source and rebuild), don't allow
  deleting the attribution.

As I see it, option 3 is "enforce" and agreed we don't want that.  But I
ee option 1 as deliberate indifference to OSM's license, and I could see
an argument that it's contributory infringement, although I think
legally it's a stretch.  Socially however, it's valid.  I meant option
2, to have the normal/default path be to get minimal compliant
attribution, and of course people can make the software do what they
want, even if it's something that isn't legally permitted (if
distributed).

I acknowledge that this is not a problem newly raised by protomaps.  I
have just been semi-surprised at the state of OSM/non-attribution in
plugins.