On 08/08/2018 13:54, Colin Smale wrote:
On 2018-08-08 14:17, Dave F wrote:
Hi
On 08/08/2018 12:14, Colin Smale wrote:
If this (probably completely static) dataset is used as a baseline,
at least these relations would have a verifiable source.
https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/business-and-government/help-and-support/products/boundary-line.html#Historicdownload
"The links above represent counties based on historic records and
mapping circa 1888 and using the primary sources of the Local
Government (England and Wales) Act 1888, the Local Government
(Scotland) Act 1889 and the Sheriffs Act 1887. "
Those are fairly inaccurate snap shots of what thought to be accurate
at that just date. As Mark G pointed out it's a ridiculous notion to
believe those boundaries can be extrapolated back to "Saxon times".
They would be accurate according to the source (viz. OS). 1888 is of
course nowhere near "Saxon times".
The contributor adding them has added no date & claims they're accurate
back to the Saxon invasion. Which is ridiculous.
If the OS-provided data were to be used as the source of the "historic
county boundaries" would that not be grounds for a possible compromise
here?
Again, where to stop? No data is destroyed. OHM provides an equivalent
database to store old data if needed.
There are plenty of examples of "former" objects in OSM - closed pubs,
railway alignments etc. They are only still there because they are
perceived to have some kind of relevance in the present day. Can a
case be made that these historic counties are still "relevant" today?
I would like to hear smb1001's take on this.
Pubs often reopen.
Disused/razed/abandoned railways should be removed from the OSM database
*but* only if they're not tagged along with current features (cycleway,
embankments, bridges etc)
smb1001 is aware of this discussion. His views are in the changeset
comments.
Cheers
DaveF
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
