The answer to your "Where is the line" is actually quite a simple question...
We have a logical inconsistency right now. We tell people that OSM contains a map of verifiable things. In fact, we remove things which are not observable! But political(administrative) boundaries are an exception to that. The explanation is always "Because a map is expected to have these boundaries", which is true, but it remains a logical inconsistency. For years there's been this "standoff" between consistency and practicality. The proposed solution would be to have another instance of the OSM database (just like we have the dev database) which uses the same API and same credentials. So what would go in there? Political boundaries. As for "splitting the project"- I think it does a little, but in a very well defined way. Only administrative boundaries would go in the administrative boundary map. You're right that it does change the nature of the project in a way, moving us from one to multiple (2) databases, and it may even be true that if we did this, people would want new databases. There are issues with any solution, but I do see a lot of consistency in this one. - Serge _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
