[Talk-GB] 'historic' county boundaries added to the database

Colin Smale colin.smale at xs4all.nl
Fri Aug 10 12:14:01 UTC 2018

On 2018-08-10 13:37, Mark Goodge wrote:

> On 10/08/2018 12:05, John Aldridge wrote:I'd like to register a +1 in favour of accepting these historic counties.
> I *generally* agree with your principle of 'only mapping what is on the ground', but if we followed that strictly we wouldn't map current administrative boundaries either. These historic counties do, rightly or wrongly, form part of some people's sense of identity *today*, and I think that crosses the bar for inclusion.
> The current administrative boundaries are relevant to everyday life in a number of different ways. Even if you can't see them on the ground, the boundaries determine who collects your bins, who you can vote for, who fixes the potholes in the roads, who manages school admissions, etc.
> The "historic" boundaries, though, whatever particular snapshot of them you choose as the most important one, don't have any relevance to everyday life. They do matter to a small number of people with specialist uses, but - like now-obliterated routes of former railways - they are better suited to a spin-off project rather than being in the core OSM.

Who is the arbiter of relevance? I think for any given "mapper" or
"consumer" 99% of the contents of OSM is not relevant. People are
mapping the nuts and bolts of the insulators on electricity pylons.. I
can't see that being relevant to most people. 

The basic principle of OSM is that it is free, in all possible senses.
There is no up-front right and wrong, nor good and bad; anything goes
unless and until it is noticed and challenged for crossing some
poorly-defined boundary. Often it is the well-intentioned mapper who
opens a discussion prior to adding their favourite information who is
the victim; I expect most mappers just "get on with it" and are never
challenged, however esoteric their mapping. I wish we could be more
consistent in this, but it will probably never happen because of our
collective allergy to limiting mappers' creative freedoms.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20180810/686e1ce7/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list