[Tagging] is the wiki descriptive or prescriptive?

[Colin Smale]

> On 11/17/2021 2:35 PM Andy Townsend <ajt1047 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>  
> On 17/11/2021 09:43, Colin Smale wrote:
> >
> > It's not about local knowledge, it's about *independent* verifiability. The memory, perception or opinion of a local mapper/resident may conflict with more definitive sources (e.g. Governments)
> 
> We need to be careful here, otherwise OSM will contain the equivalent of 
> "we've always been at war with Eastasia" *
> 
> Governments of all political stripes (democracies included) regularly 
> tell half-truths and outright lies, including lies that are incompatible 
> with the lies that other governments are telling.  The largest countries 
> in Asia claim they have borders that are incompatible with each other - 
> OSM can try and reflect "X claims Y" (something that has been rejected 
> ** in OSM) or reflect the "on the ground" situation (which is what we 
> mostly do).
 
Yes I agree inter-state boundary disputes are "awkward" however you look at them. To be honest I was thinking more about more mundane things like (internal) admin boundaries, place names, road numbering, that kind of thing. Signage on the ground frequently disagrees with official sources, but both points of view have some validity. When there are no signs on the ground however, relying on someone's "memory" to establish that a road is called XYZ (there used to be a sign but it was removed in the 60s) to overrule a government database saying it's called ABC is a bit dodgy. Which is more "independently verifiable"?