[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boundary=aboriginal_lands
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Thu Nov 29 03:16:26 UTC 2018
In California there are “End Freeway” signs, usually between the last
interchange and about 1/2 mike before the first at-grade intersection
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:54 AM Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 7:46 PM Alan McConchie <alan.mcconchie at gmail.com>
>> I want to take your feedback with the weight and respect it deserves. I
>> see you voted against "boundary=aboriginal_lands" on the wiki because you
>> prefer "boundary=administrative". Can you clarify more about your proposed
>> In this thread I see you're a fan of admin_level=*, but what admin_level
>> do you propose? The problem I see with that tag is that it follows a strict
>> hierarchy, which reservations don't always follow. It's the hierarchical
>> nature of boundary=administrative that I get hung up on, which is why I
>> like that boundary=aboriginal_lands can exist parallel to that hierarchy.
>> For example, if we used boundary=administrative + admin_level=3 (as Kevin
>> Kenny suggested in this thread) that seems clearly wrong for the few
>> reservations that cross national boundaries, like Akwesasne.
> I don't know if a consistent administrative level is possible given the
> context of each particular tribe and it's respective relationship with the
> US and Canada. This may need to be determined on a case-by-case
> situation. I do think that admin_level=3 is a pretty reasonable in the US
> because within tribal lands, if at least one party is a tribal citizen of
> the nation they're in, I'm not aware of one that doesn't automatically
> moves jurisdiction to tribal or federal courts *exclusively,* with state
> and county courts not having jurisdiction. In some cases, this might apply
> to any criminal or civil case within the jurisdiction regardless of who is
>> I can understand how others might see boundary=aboriginal_lands as a tag
>> that carries less respect. But I don't see it that way.
> Part of it is the strong tendency of folks making renders to fill-shade
> the tribal territory like it's a park, wildlife preserve or zoo. Carto
> used to have a green "IR" hatch that was almost indistinguishable from the
> same colored "NR" hatch for indian reservations (which was easily half of
> my annoyance on the subject in 2013). Treating tribal boundaries as other
> political boundaries humanizes the situation.
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging