[OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries

[Paul Johnson]

The previous tagging was inadequate, bordering on offensive (particularly
with the rendering, which suggested indian nations and reservations were
the same and more of a touristic draw than administratively significant).
 I've suggested using administrative level 3 and 5 for the purpose in north
america, but this doesn't quite cover edge cases along national boundaries
that don't apply to the indian nations in question; not sure if this might
be a good or practical use for 1 or not.  Either way, my idea for using
these admin levels has been met with deafening silence.


On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Clifford Snow <clifford at snowandsnow.us>wrote:

> Looking at the wiki for help understanding why we don't have boundaries
> reservations has left me confused. Can someone explain why they are not
> there and if there is any plans to add them at some point in the future?
>
> From personal experience, it is important to know when you are on tribal
> lands. Often different laws apply. In one Southwest part of the US, you
> actually have to pay to take pictures on tribal lands. So knowing where you
> are is important.
>
> I think I understand that the existing administrative levels don't work.
> In the US at least, the reservations have a  "domestic dependent nation"
> status.  They are not States, Counties yet contain cities. The often extend
> past state boundaries, and certainly county boundaries.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Clifford
>
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130419/984df0d3/attachment.html>