Re: [Tagging] Update - RFC - Special Economic Zones
I appreciate the pointed questions offered here. See responses in-line: On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 4:37 AM Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > my opinion is that stuff that is not visible on the ground and not > meaningfully editable by mappers needs a very strong reason to be mapped > at all. > > 1. Are SEZ boundaries visible on the ground (signage, physical separation)? > Both types of SEZ boundaries exist. Some are tagged with signage and physical separation (as in the example photo in the proposal) and others are legally-defined but invisible lines. This is the exact same situation as with all other values of boundary. boundary=administrative, boundary=postal_code, boundary=protected_area, and boundary=aboriginal_lands are all examples of boundaries which sometimes do and sometimes do not manifest in physical features on the ground. Mapping SEZs is consistent with this usage, and has been listed in the wiki under the tag protect_class=23 for 10+ years. If SEZs should not be mapped by this criterion, then all 2 million usages of the key boundary= should also not be mapped. We have formed a consensus through usage that boundaries of various types should be mapped, regardless of whether or not those boundaries physically manifest in features on the ground. > 2. If not, do SEZ boundaries usually coincide with existing > administrative boundaries (counties X and Y as well as the city of Z > together form the SEZ)? > Both cases exist. Some SEZs are defined in terms of existing boundaries, and others have dedicated boundaries. This is similar to the case of boundary=postal_code. > 3. If not, how would you get your hands on the SEZ boundary? > By definition, an SEZ is an area in which laws are different from outside the zone. Implicit in that definition is the requirement that the boundary be legally defined. It is in those legal definitions that mappers can plot such zones. This is no different from the manner in which we are able to map boundary=administrative and boundary=postal_code. 4. In how far is it useful for mappers to modify the SEZ boundary based > on their knowledge or aerial imagery? In places where the SEZ manifests in physical objects (signs, fences, entrances, etc.), such knowledge or aerial imagery is indeed useful for mapping such boundaries. In the absence of these, mappers can use legal definitions. This is again no different from how we deal with boundary=administrative. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Update - RFC - Special Economic Zones
Hi, my opinion is that stuff that is not visible on the ground and not meaningfully editable by mappers needs a very strong reason to be mapped at all. 1. Are SEZ boundaries visible on the ground (signage, physical separation)? 2. If not, do SEZ boundaries usually coincide with existing administrative boundaries (counties X and Y as well as the city of Z together form the SEZ)? 3. If not, how would you get your hands on the SEZ boundary? 4. In how far is it useful for mappers to modify the SEZ boundary based on their knowledge or aerial imagery? Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Update - RFC - Special Economic Zones
I would say that the Chinese mapping community should decide which of these areas fit the definition of an SEZ, and tag those areas accordingly. The Wikipedia article on SEZs ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_economic_zone) has both a definition as well as a list of sub-categories of SEZs that local mappers can apply to specific zones. This proposal does not create a fully-comprehensive tagging scheme for SEZs. The different types of SEZs that you note perhaps ought to have new tagging invented in order to indicate the specific types of SEZ or any other characteristic. I would welcome that as a follow-on proposal to provide further definition and specificity to SEZ tagging. This proposal is deliberately and narrowly focused on gaining consensus on the top level tag only (all SEZs are tagged boundary=special_economic_zone), while leaving open the question of what further sub-tagging might be necessary to more specifically tag these areas. On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 11:47 PM Phake Nick wrote: > How do you identify different types of soecial ecobomic zones? For > exmaple, in China, you have Hainan, which is a special economic zone for > tourism, you have Shenzhen, which is for policy innivation, you have > Tianjin Binhai new area, which is for logistics, you have a Cloud computing > special management district in Chongqing for internet, you have Shanghai > Waigaoqiao free trade zone for tax, you have Pingtan comprehensive > experiment zone for cooperation with Taiwan, and then you also have Qianhai > Special economic zone which is a service and industry themed zone within > the special economic zone of Shenzhen. > > Which of them should/shouldnt be tagged as special ecobomic zone? How to > differentiate between them? > > 在 2020年11月3日週二 11:55，Brian M. Sperlongano 寫道： > >> Folks: >> >> Last week I opened an RFC for the proposed new tag >> boundary=special_economic_zone. That announcement generated only minimal >> discussion, resulting in a minor change to the proposal to address the >> concern raised. I am sending this update to ensure that the community has >> adequate opportunity to provide input. If no significant comments are >> received, I intend to proceed to a vote starting on 9 Nov, after the >> two-week minimum comment period has elapsed. >> >> Proposal: >> >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Special_economic_zone >> ___ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Update - RFC - Special Economic Zones
How do you identify different types of soecial ecobomic zones? For exmaple, in China, you have Hainan, which is a special economic zone for tourism, you have Shenzhen, which is for policy innivation, you have Tianjin Binhai new area, which is for logistics, you have a Cloud computing special management district in Chongqing for internet, you have Shanghai Waigaoqiao free trade zone for tax, you have Pingtan comprehensive experiment zone for cooperation with Taiwan, and then you also have Qianhai Special economic zone which is a service and industry themed zone within the special economic zone of Shenzhen. Which of them should/shouldnt be tagged as special ecobomic zone? How to differentiate between them? 在 2020年11月3日週二 11:55，Brian M. Sperlongano 寫道： > Folks: > > Last week I opened an RFC for the proposed new tag > boundary=special_economic_zone. That announcement generated only minimal > discussion, resulting in a minor change to the proposal to address the > concern raised. I am sending this update to ensure that the community has > adequate opportunity to provide input. If no significant comments are > received, I intend to proceed to a vote starting on 9 Nov, after the > two-week minimum comment period has elapsed. > > Proposal: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Special_economic_zone > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
