Move copyright link to attribution control

[jfirebaugh]

Its current location, under "Help" in the sidebar, feels a bit out of place -- information about OSM copyright and license is not really "Help".

Placing it in the standard Leaflet attribution control also has the benefit of being something we can point to as a canonical example of an acceptable way to attribute OSM.

[tomhughes]

I don't have a problem with putting this in the standard attribution, but I'd really like to hear what other people think about removing this from the side bar.

In the context of our site this link is about more than just providing attribution for the pretty map - it's a key link for providing information about how to engage with using our data and I worry about reducing it's prominence.

I think @systemed created it originally so maybe he has some thoughts? or any of the LWG people?

[lxbarth]

• Put it under "Data" in sidebar?

[woodpeck]

There's an argument to be made both ways. jfirebaugh has a point about the "canonical example" - we've had people in the past acting surprised about having to add attribution, saying "but OSM itself doesn't have it". But tomhughes has a point about "reducing prominence". Nobody looks at the small print in the corner of a map - for us, the license is an essential part of what we're doing, not some footnote "btw we got our map from provider X".

Suggestion:

• add canonical attribution like jfirebaugh suggested
• do not remove it from the sidebar though
• if the "Help" headline doesn't work for what's below it, change the headline and not the content below it ;)

[pnorman]

I see three issues:

• The link is about more than providing requiring attribution for a map, as raised by TomH.
• On browse pages there is a map on the right and some data on the left. The Copyright & License applies to both, but putting it in the map would make seem that the license applies only to the map, not to both parts. The same applies to when viewing data with Browse Map Data.
• Some pages (e.g. browsing deleted objects) display no map at all but have ODbL OSM data.

I wouldn't be opposed to adding the attribution on the OSM Mapnik layer for instructional value. It isn't like we can use that corner for displaying something else, after all we need it for credit for the other layers.

[rnorris]

I fully agree with other commentators - have both.
Keep the sidebar link, albeit probably slightly better under the 'Data' heading.
Add the new in map attribution as a 'standard' way to do it.

[EdLoach]

If you're going to add "© OpenStreetMap contributors" to the standard layer (which I support as part of the 'have both' discussion above), then you should probably also add "Data © OpenStreetMap contributors" to all the other layer attributions at the same time. And if we are showing 'how it should be done', then perhaps instead of using Andy's name on the transport and cycle layers, we should mention Thunderforest as per his terms and conditions http://thunderforest.com/terms/

[tomhughes]

This pull does add it to all the layers (it doesn't have the "Data" prefix though).

As to the credit on the @gravitystorm layers I have already told him to shout if he wants me to change it to Thunderforest.

[systemed]

+1 to having it both on the map and in the sidebar. It's not just the attribution for the map; it's our instructions on how to use OSM data legally (and heaven knows enough people seem to have some inexplicable difficulty doing that...).

[jfirebaugh]

Ok, restored existing link and moved it to "Data".

[tomhughes]

Merged.