Article URL: https://www.andreagrandi.it/posts/why-book-corners-wont-sync-contributions-back-to-openstreetmap/ Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49149746 Points: 5…

When I introduced Book Corners, I explained that much of its initial data came from OpenStreetMap. OSM gave the project a useful starting point, with thousands of public bookcases already mapped around the world. Book Corners also accepts new libraries directly from its users. People can submit a location and a photo, and the contribution becomes public after moderation. It seemed only fair that, when one of those submissions was missing from OSM, Book Corners should be able to contribute it back. The idea was not to create an uncontrolled background synchronisation process. The workflow I had in mind was deliberately cautious: From a software-development perspective, this looked like a manageable integration: add consent, track contribution state, build a preview, authenticate with OSM, and create the new feature through its API. Once I started researching the implementation properly, I discovered that writing to the API was only a small part of the work. Because the information would come from the Book Corners database, OSM could consider it an external-data import. Because software would prepare and submit the changes, it could also fall under the rules for script-assisted or automated edits, even though an administrator would review each individual library. Following the conservative interpretation of the OSM Import Guidelines and the Automated Edits code of conduct would require more than a dedicated account and an OAuth token. There are also important licensing questions. A user’s permission to send a library to OSM is not automatically the same as having a sufficiently clear right to release that factual information under terms compatible with OSM. The user-facing explanation and consent would need to cover that distinction, including confirming that the information was not copied from an incompatible source.