[Tagging] Related: Antarctic territories
fernando.trebien at gmail.com
Fri Dec 27 01:46:44 UTC 2013
That's what I thought, thank you.
In principle, if Antarctic territories' status is said to be only "claimed"
(as described by the Antarctic Treaty), they can't be considered "de
facto", therefore they shouldn't currently be specified as members of the
boundary relations of Norway, Australia and Argentina using an "outer" role
(as they are right now), right?
The only things on the ground are research stations and there are many
countries involved, many of which overlapping the claimed territories (in
fact they look quite mixed with no apparent pattern), and from many nations
that do not claim any territory in Antarctica.
On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com>wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Fernando Trebien <
> fernando.trebien at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Makes sense. But is this practice (of using "dejure" and "defacto" roles)
>> already being adopted widely? If so, isn't it breaking compatibility with
>> many apps (for instance, Mapnik, but probably others too)?
> The only currently accepted way-related roles in boundary relations are
> 'inner' and 'outer' (with 'enclave' and 'exclave' as deprecated variants).
> Current boundary relations are also intended to map de facto borders based
> on our on-the-ground principle.
> Using 'dejure' or 'claimed' roles is currently just a suggestion and is
> unused. Introducing this new role may break existing tools, especially
> those that ignore the 'inner' and 'outer' roles and attempt to construct
> the boundary using all member ways regardless of role.
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
+55 (51) 9962-5409
"The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months." (Moore's law)
"The speed of software halves every 18 months." (Gates' law)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging