Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: DWG policy on Crimea

2018-10-23 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
sent from a phone > On 23. Oct 2018, at 11:06, Christoph Hormann wrote: > > I think that would not be verifiable. Different political fractions > often even have different opinions on the extent of their country. OSM > is not a place to record a spectrum of opinions on political goals and

Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: DWG policy on Crimea

2018-10-23 Thread Johnparis
This thread has strayed rather far afield from the original question, which was whether the OSM depiction of Crimea corresponds to the OSMF policy. It seems clear to me that it does not. I would suggest that the depiction of Northern Cyprus does not correspond to the policy either. The actual phys

Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: DWG policy on Crimea

2018-10-23 Thread Greg Troxel
Paul Johnson writes: > Not to mention that the situation of a country claiming territory that it > physically controls, but only it recognizes, is also a relatively rare > thing this decade. Playing it conservatively in the "Russia claims Crimea > and controls it, but unilaterally and by force f

Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: DWG policy on Crimea

2018-10-23 Thread Christoph Hormann
On Tuesday 23 October 2018, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Agreed. I would be tempted to say, however, that if a country > requires a certain boundary depiction by law, like e.g. India and > China do, then that's the same level of verifiability like that > country's internal boundaries for which we also

Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: DWG policy on Crimea

2018-10-23 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi, On 23.10.2018 11:06, Christoph Hormann wrote: > I think that would not be verifiable. Different political fractions > often even have different opinions on the extent of their country. OSM > is not a place to record a spectrum of opinions Agreed. I would be tempted to say, however, that

Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: DWG policy on Crimea

2018-10-23 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
23. Oct 2018 08:57 by frede...@remote.org : > It would however be interesting to develop a tagging scheme that lets us > not only record "this border is disputed" but also "this is the extent > of country X according to country Y", which we currently don't have. >

Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: DWG policy on Crimea

2018-10-23 Thread Christoph Hormann
On Tuesday 23 October 2018, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > It would however be interesting to develop a tagging scheme that lets > us not only record "this border is disputed" but also "this is the > extent of country X according to country Y", which we currently don't > have. I think that would not be