On 20/11/2018 13:09, Tomas Straupis wrote:
Can you give an example where things in OpenStreetMap are mapped in a different way than overwhelming majority of world thinks?
If "the UN" counts for "the overwhelming majority of the world", there are quite a few examples. The UN recognises territories the don't currently exist on the ground in their UN-regognised form (e.g. Western Sahara) and it has places such as Gibraltar on its "non-self-governing" list that have had referenda about their status (e.g. Gibraltar).
Neither is necessarily "wrong" - they're just different criteria. The UN has resolutions (which may confusingly conflict with each other depending on the politics of the time), OSM has https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf .
Note: I'm not asking to tag Crimea as just Ukraine (which would be my personal opinion). I'm asking to have an open discussion of disputed territory rules
An open discussion of how we recognise territories in OSM and how to handled places where we know there are disputes makes sense; I'd already suggested exactly that in the "Add some tag to identify disputed borders" thread.
To be clear though - it would be a big change for OSM to stop trying to make an "accurate" map (in terms of "who controls what") and instead to try and create some sort of "politically correct" one. To do that you'd really want to round up some OSMF members to lobby the OSMF board to change the policy, as it's really not something that the DWG makes up as it goes along.
Best Regards, Andy _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
