On 07/05/16 11:54, Andy Townsend wrote: > The problem with answering Rory's original question directly is that in > OSM we try and "map what's on the ground", and don't map stuff that's > never going to happen (for example, if a village thinks that it'd be > really nice if there was a bypass around it, but there's no concrete > proposal, no funding and no likelihood of it happening, we don't map > that bypass). A number of territory claims are for national historic > pride reasons only and are unlikely ever to result in any changes to > actual administrative boundaries*.
I'm not suggesting mapping every little "someone in $COUNTRY thinks $AREA should be in their country", I'm suggesting mapping areas which governments claim. Imagine you had to make a map for the government of $COUNTRY, and they required the borders to be one way. That's the kind of thing that I think should be in OSM. You should be able to use OSM, and only OSM, to make a map that is acceptable to any government. Both of the example maps of Russia/Ukraine and India/Pakistan require the use of another data set. Which is a shame. One should be able to generate that from OSM entirely. Rory _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
