[OSM-talk] Review of name and boundary tagging - revised and amended guidelines to address and resolve disputes

Bert -Araali- Van Opstal bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com
Wed Jul 14 11:40:32 UTC 2021


On 13/07/2021 16:47, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 9:38 AM Bert -Araali- Van Opstal 
> <bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com 
> <mailto:bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 13/07/2021 09:11, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote:
>
>>     Jul 12, 2021, 16:17 by bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com>:
>>
>>         C. if the above fail to reach a consensus, what is the fall
>>         back scenario. Do we define a reference framework, like the
>>         UN or others ?
>>
>>     No.
>>
>>     Definite no to putting "regulations from the UN" above actual
>>     situation.
>     I agree, it is not what I said as to be proposed. I said
>     resolutions from the UN are fall back reference frames when the
>     OSM community fails to reach a consensus using our own guidelines
>     framework.
>
>
> I do not think that this is a workable solution.  There are many cases 
> where a local community is not in agreement with international 
> organizations, and this would effectively be choosing a winner based 
> on fiat rather than doing the more difficult but necessary work of 
> achieving a compromise that all sides can live with.
I agree that it's not desirable. Again, it's a fall back scenario in 
case local communities cannot agree and escalate it with editing wars. 
Of course, local communities disagree with international organisations. 
In my proposal I will include some suggestions how dialogue and a 
process to consensus between local communities could be improved, rather 
then starting editing wars and escalating them to other map features.It 
shouldn't be a desired permanent situation though, if through other 
processes a consensus is reached of course as a community we will allow 
the name tag to reflect local use, as intended and guided in our wiki.

Leaving the name field empty or freezing it on a biased status is, I 
believe not favoured by the majority. Is not going to stop the wars 
which, at the same time undermine the dialogue which might be ongoing in 
a search for consensus. But we are open to alternative suggestions of 
course.

Greetings,

Bert Araali

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210714/4f3ca88b/attachment.htm>


More information about the talk mailing list