<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>This is a boring discussion, and only triggered by what should be
out of OSM : National Claims.</p>
<p>Borders are almost invisible on the ground either, at least in
civilized countries.<br>
</p>
<p>And if we just decided to leave out all country
borders..<humour>...in a utopic effort to re-unite the world
? </humour><br>
</p>
<p>Wouldn't that be inline with the Free Map thought....? <br>
</p>
<p>Gert<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 23-11-2018 16:34, Yuri Astrakhan
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAJGfNe-Kz9q7yzsQ=yL8kVbxQcyzThSTMS5PZCCcRq7Xf1PziQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">Frederik,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I suspect the "default" is what the community took the main
issue with. DWG essentially declaring that there must be a
single truth for non-overlapping country borders is what seems
to have caused all this. Simply saying that every country can
define their own would have averted this whole thing.</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 2:24 AM Frederik Ramm
<<a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">frederik@remote.org</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<br>
On 23.11.2018 01:42, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:<br>
> One idea (perhaps this should go into a separete thread):<br>
<br>
There already is a separate thread over on the tagging list
started just<br>
a couple of weeks ago. I suggest that would be a good place to
continue<br>
the discussion.<br>
<br>
Being able to map different claims is certainly interesting,
in so far<br>
as they are verifiable (which surprisingly often is not the
case). But<br>
all that's already been mentioned over at<br>
<a
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-October/040333.html"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-October/040333.html</a><br>
<br>
I fear that this is only "kicking the can down the road"
though because<br>
we'd likely have - just as we have with names - one "default"
set of<br>
boundaries where we say "that's the one you get if you don't
ask for any<br>
particular one", and the fight would then be on which one that
is going<br>
to be. And judging from how this decision is blown out of
proportion<br>
("OMG OSM SUPPORTS TERRORISTS!") I am sure that people would
display<br>
exactly the same outrage when discussing which one of a large
set of<br>
mapped claims gets the "default" flag.<br>
<br>
> I especially appreciate 4.2 -- the fact that this
decision is very bad for the data users -- <br>
<br>
I think you have misread Victor's 4.2 which essentially says
that data<br>
users currently have to make up their own boundaries anyway
and that<br>
therefore this decision does not *help* them. He does not say
that it is<br>
good or bad, just that it does not improve an already-bad
situation.<br>
<br>
As for whether<br>
<br>
> DWG has gone too far into the political landscape -
something I hope it did not intend to do.<br>
<br>
let me quote from the DWG statement - again:<br>
<br>
"The Data Working Group takes no stance on if Russia's control
is legal<br>
or not, as that is not within our scope."<br>
<br>
The DWG has simply applied a policy that has existed in OSM
since before<br>
Crimea's annexation. That policy was written by LWG and
approved by the<br>
OSMF board in 2013 and has been applied many, many times since
and it<br>
has generally worked well for OSM. It certainly can be
discussed and<br>
improved but that needs to be on a general level, and not
tacking on an<br>
"Ukraine exemption" to the rule.<br>
<br>
Bye<br>
Frederik<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Frederik Ramm ## eMail <a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">frederik@remote.org</a>
## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
talk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org">talk@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Independent Expert on CE marking
Harmonised Standards (HAS-) Consultant @ European Commission for RED and EMC
EMC Consultant
Electrical Safety Consultant</pre>
</body>
</html>