Re: [Talk-us] ref tags

[stevea]

Thank you, Paul:  not only do I stand corrected, I am glad to be 
corrected (improved, really) in this way.  (I did know, in fact, the 
number to be greater than "fifty something.")  I only "planted the 
seed," and you more fully grew the tree of this particular truth.  I, 
too, am not sure of a more accurate number, only that it is somewhere 
between "fifty something" and "200+."


Native reservations still seem to be a not-completely-settled issue 
as to admin_level value, I do wish the OSM community could reach more 
harmonious agreement here.  Discussions like this, which really only 
scratch surfaces, are a good start.


I see persuasive arguments for either admin_level=1 (for the 
US-Canada border stragglers?) or 3 for most or all of these regions. 
Perhaps an OSM wiki discussion can be started, continued or 
resurrected.  Or maybe a new thread.  A new thread should change 
Subject away from "ref tags."  Also, talk-us may or may not be a 
correct forum for this discussion.


I did recently (Volume 62, Issue 1) start a discussion in talk-us 
about admin_level which turned into contributions in the wiki page 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_admin_level, which 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Minh_Nguyen cleaned up by 
"drawing off" further discussion to 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_admin_level#admin_level.3D5_proposal 
(thank you Minh).  That (or a new section in it) may be an 
appropriate place to continue a discussion of native reservations in 
the US being assigned an admin_level of 1, 3 or some other value.  Or 
even something else we may agree to do.


SteveA
California


On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:18 PM, stevea 
<stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote:


In other words, New York is just as sovereign as is New Zealand, 
South Dakota is as much a nation-state as South Korea.  I am not an 
attorney, but I can read.  This makes for 51 independent 
jurisdictions:  the fifty states and the United States at a federal 
level.  (There might be "fifty-something" independent jurisdictions 
if we include DC, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, US Virgin Islands... 
but all of those extras are really separate areas of the single 
"federal state").  The latter (the federal USA) is, legally 
speaking, absolutely distinct from each of the former (the sovereign 
fifty states).  Let OSM properly reflect that.



More like 200+, actually.  Indian nations are usually above the 
state level, below the US level, with a few exceptions that stand 
independent straddling the US/Canada border.  These aren't mapped 
yet, mostly because suggestions to use administrative boundary 
levels 3 and 1 as default levels most tribes and the border 
stragglers have either gone ignored or shot down.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] ref tags

[Paul Johnson]

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 2:59 AM, stevea  wrote:

> Thank you, Paul:  not only do I stand corrected, I am glad to be corrected
> (improved, really) in this way.  (I did know, in fact, the number to be
> greater than "fifty something.")  I only "planted the seed," and you more
> fully grew the tree of this particular truth.  I, too, am not sure of a
> more accurate number, only that it is somewhere between "fifty something"
> and "200+."


Considering that there's nearly 40 in the area within relation 161645
(Oklahoma), I'd honestly be surprised if there aren't at least 50-something
just within states starting with "O".
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] ref tags

[David ``Smith'']

I largely agree with Minh and SteveA.  I would like to further emphasize
that ref tags on ways should appear natural to locals, and some ambiguity
or omissions are acceptable.  There are use cases which might want to
include this kind of route data, but not as a critical component of the
map, such as a locator map for a business advertisement, or a utility's map
of copper wire thefts in 2012.  A simple text label like "I-70/71" or
"I-465" or "SR 68" is just fine in those cases. In fact, I oppose
deprecating the ref tag on ways, specifically to support such simple use
cases. Consumers who want their maps to show routes correctly, completely,
and unambiguously, can do this more efficiently by parsing route relations
and avoid a lot of headaches in the process.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] ref tags

[Nathan Mills]

On 2/13/2013 6:27 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:


Considering that there's nearly 40 in the area within relation 161645 
(Oklahoma), I'd honestly be surprised if there aren't at least 
50-something just within states starting with "O".




AFAIK, all of the reservations in Oklahoma were allotted before 
statehood. There is, obviously, some land that has been taken into trust 
by BIA for the casinos. Osage County is the closest thing we have to a 
reservation, but even there only mineral rights are fully native owned. 
There are tribal governments here, but no reservations.


-Nathan

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] ref tags

[Paul Johnson]

Not reservations as such, but there are tribal boundaries that last to this
day.  Osage County/Nation isn't the only one.  Heck, just drive around
Tulsa, and you'll see "Entering the Cherokee/Muscogee (Creek)/Osage Nation"
signs bisecting the city into thirds centered roughly at the
244/412/51/LL/64 (and there's probably 546732469 other refs I'm omitting)
interchange in downtown.  Several smaller nations are in the
Kansas/Missouri corner.  The Choctaw Nation dominates the Ouachitas.  And
yeah, the Osage got truly hosed...


On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Nathan Mills  wrote:

> On 2/13/2013 6:27 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>>
>> Considering that there's nearly 40 in the area within relation 161645
>> (Oklahoma), I'd honestly be surprised if there aren't at least 50-something
>> just within states starting with "O".
>>
>>
> AFAIK, all of the reservations in Oklahoma were allotted before statehood.
> There is, obviously, some land that has been taken into trust by BIA for
> the casinos. Osage County is the closest thing we have to a reservation,
> but even there only mineral rights are fully native owned. There are tribal
> governments here, but no reservations.
>
> -Nathan
>
>
> __**_
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us