I took from that message that the person was talking about not putting property lines in OSM, not about removing geopolitical boundaries. Mapping property lines is problematic for your average mapper and doing so accurately is an even bigger challenge. If I had to pick where to expend my mapping resources, I'd pick other things to map first before mapping lot lines.
Oh, and the Romans built walls all over the place to define their boundaries, many of which are still in existence today (eg Hadrian's Wall). --G Sent from my iPhone. On 2012-12-29, at 12:49, Bruno Remy <bremy.qc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > In this post of Talk-US, Frederik suggests NOT mapping administrative > boundaries that are not visible on ground (fences, toll, etc...) > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-December/010026.html > > Don't you think that the notion of "virtual" or not is absolutly not > applicable on administrative boundaries?! Since humanity exists, > administrative boundaries determines the link beetween (population) > Gouvernements and Geography. Look at our history: except The Great Wall of > China, most of old and big Empires settled their boundaries without marks > (fences....). > Look at most administrative boundaries in Sahel (Mali, Mauritanie) or in the > the United States (Nevada, Arizona): Long strait virtual lines into Desert > Land, without fences neither natural limits (rivers...). > And what about limits beetween USA and Canada in the Oceans and See? > Do we delete those boundaries because they're not "visible"? > > So ... deleting (or nor drawing) administrative boundaries makes no sence in > this way! > Dont'you mind? > > A Map has to be a citizen information of administrative and geographical data > (and this includes administrative boundaries) and not "2D version of what > OpenStreetMap offers in 3D version" > > With political, historical and administrative point-of-view a map should not > apply the principe of "What You See Is What You Get". > If this were the case, only satelites will remain the "only single base > material of GIS", and map will die! Isn't it? > > I don't think so but i wonder the absurdity of such arguments in favor of > "WYSIWYG" in mapping. > > What do you think of that? > > Bruno Remy > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
