<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body><div>Hey Stewart,</div><div><br></div><div>CSDs are legal boundaries - I.e. the legal boundary of a lower tier municipality.</div><div><br></div><div>CSD = city/town/township</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div id="composer_signature"><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757" dir="auto">Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.</div></div><div><br></div><div style="font-size:100%;color:#000000"><!-- originalMessage --><div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: "Stewart C. Russell" <scruss@gmail.com> </div><div>Date: 2017-03-07 1:05 PM (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org </div><div>Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries </div><div><br></div></div>On 2017-03-07 10:36 AM, Bjenk Ellefsen wrote:<br>> <br>> … Any more thoughts?<br><br>If you're planning to import/add abstract statistical boundaries, rather<br>than those defined by municipal boundaries, then I'd suggest that they<br>don't belong in OSM.<br><br> “Contributions to OpenStreetmap should be:<br> 1. Truthful - means that you cannot contribute something you have<br> invented.<br> 2. Legal - means that you don't copy copyrighted data without<br> permission.<br> 3. Verifiable - means that others can go there and see for<br> themselves if your data is correct.<br> 4. Relevant - means that you have to use tags that make clear to<br> others how to re-use the data<br><br> When in doubt, also consider the "on the ground rule": map the world<br> as it can be observed by someone physically there.”<br><br> — How We Map <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map><br><br>Unless CSDs are physically observable, they are too abstract for OSM.<br><br> Stewart<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Talk-ca mailing list<br>Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org<br>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca<br></body></html>