[OSM-talk-be] ardenne - way 890280505

[Jan Cnops]

The Ardennes should be on an equal footing with, say, the Condroz or
the Kempen, which aren't mapped either. That means that a map like the
one in Wikipedia with the reions of Belgium, 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condroz#/media/File:R%C3%A9gions_naturelles_de_Belgique.jpg
,cannot be derived from OSM. To make mentioning the Ardennes in OSM
useful, all other regions should be mapped too, and I do not think at
present there is much demand for such a thing. But I'll never object to
a project of this kind: the power of OSM is that mappers with interests
not extending to everything in OSM still can make contributions.
JanFi

Karel ADAMS schreef op do 08-07-2021 om 14:30 [+0000]:
>     Je tends à être d'accord. Le principe de base est que nous
>       "mappons" tout ce qui est visible sur place. Ores j'ai survolé
>       l'Ardenne multiple fois (et avec grand plaisir!) sans pourtant
>       jamais voir aucune frontière Ardennaise :)
> 
>     Karel
> 
>     
> 
>     On 7/8/21 1:34 PM, Pierre Parmentier
>       wrote:
> 
>     
> 
>     
> >       
> >       
> >         Hello,
> > 
> >         
> >         
> > 
> >         
> >         I was recently
> >           intrigued by this way whose name is
> > Ardenne/Ardennes/Ardennen. I think that
> >           this type of data has no place in OpenStreetMap today.
> > 
> >           
> > 
> >           Why not? First some references ...
> > 
> >           
> >             (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ardenne)
> >             (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ardenne#Communes)
> >               Including a list of communes located in Belgium, the
> > Grand
> >               Duchy of Luxembourg and France].
> >             (
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dmountain_range)
> >             
> >             (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cha%C3%AEne_de_montagnes
> > )
> >             
> >             (
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mountain_ranges#Europe)
> >               It does not appear that the Ardennes is considered a
> >               mountain range.
> >             In Denis, Jacques. Geography of Belgium. Brussels:
> > Crédit
> >                 communal de
> >                 Belgique,
> >                 1992 there is a map (p. 137) that shows the major
> >               morphological units of Belgium. The Northern
> > Ardennes,
> >               the Central Ardennes
> >               and the Southern Ardennes
> >               are among 19 other units.
> >           
> >           It is clear from all this that the Ardenne is a
> > geological concept.
> >           The data does not belong to OpenStreetMap at this stage.
> >           Tags relating to geology are few in number and generally
> > very
> >           precisely located. (
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:geological).
> >           This is not the case with the way 890280505.
> > 
> >           
> > 
> >           OK, there are several types of boundaries in OSM. But
> > these are - generally -
> >           official and public data which are not contestable. The
> >           boundaries of the Ardennes
> >           are too imprecise and hardly verifiable in the field by
> > an
> >           ordinary contributor. Who will arbitrate on possible
> > boundary
> >           changes?
> > 
> >           
> > 
> >           The route created by Florimondable
> >           may be well-intentioned. But it seems to me to be
> > unmanageable
> >           in OSM.
> > 
> >           
> > 
> >           But that's just my point of view.
> >         
> > 
> >         
> >         I contacted
> >           both the first (Florimondable)
> >           and the last (Stereo) publisher.
> >         
> > 
> >         
> >         I asked Florimondable the reason of this
> >           way. He answered 'J’ai ajouté
> >             le massif montagneux des Ardennes parce qu’il… existe.
> > Pour sa géométrie je ne suis pas du tout un spécialiste de ce
> > massif,
> >             j’ai donc fait au mieux de mes connaissances.'
> >           [I added the Ardennes
> >           mountain range because it... exists. For its geometry I
> > am not
> >           at all a specialist of this massif, so I did the best of
> > my
> >           knowledge]. 
> > 
> >         
> >         
> > 
> >         
> >         For Stereo 'Si
> >             Florimondable
> >             n’a pas vraiment
> >             l’utilité du polygone, pas
> >             d’objection à ce
> >             qu’il disparaisse. Je ne connais malheureusement
> >             pas de rendu qui utilise ce genre de trucs.' [If
> >           Florimondable
> >           doesn't really have a use for the polygon, no objection
> > to it
> >           disappearing. Unfortunately I don't know of any rendering
> > that
> >           uses this kind of stuff.].
> > 
> >           
> > 
> >           What do you think of this? Should we keep these types of
> > data
> >           in OSM? The French
> >           and the German mappers should be involved.
> > 
> >         
> >         
> > 
> >         
> >         Pierre aka foxandpotatoes
> >         
> > 
> >         
> >       
> >       
> > 
> >       
> >       _______________________________________________Talk-be
> > mailing listTalk-be at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> > 
> >     
> 
>   
> 
> _______________________________________________Talk-be mailing 
> listTalk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20210708/343479a2/attachment-0001.htm>