On 20/09/2018 18:37, Adam Snape wrote:
Hi,
If these boundaries were purely of historical interest I doubt that
you'd find many experienced contributors arguing for their inclusion
in OSM. The argument is that these areas retain a continued cultural
geographic relevance.
No, they don't. They have relevance to the past.
People with no particularinterest in history can and do still consider
themselves as living in (for eg.) Wigan, Lancashire or Dentdale,
Yorkshire (administratively in the Yorkshire Dales but not Yorkshire -
how ridiculous!).
Great. Let them consider themselves so. It has little to do with OSM &
nothing to do with this specific subject.
To me the best comparison is with loc_name and old_name, tags in which
we appreciate the significance of older or alternate names for areas
where they retain some current significance.
You disproved your own argument - old_name is used on current, still
existing entities.
Btw, I'm surprised that we've got this far without mention (unless
I've missed it) the Government's position on this issue, namely that
despite ceasing to have administrative function, the traditional
counties continue to exist and form an important part of of local
identities:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/eric-pickles-celebrate-st-george-and-englands-traditional-counties
I'm sorry, but this is just descending into barrel scraping
whataboutery. The views of a political point scoring MP is irrelevant to
OSM decisions
Cheers
DaveF.
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
