Ian, I'm an OSM volunteer (http://hdyc.neis-one.org/?dandv) and I've
submitted updates since 2008 based on my own observations on the ground. I
fully support and understand the mission of OSM.

Imaginary boundaries, unfortunately, can by definition not be confirmed on
the ground. Yet their utility is also quite clear. OSM features county
lines and many other administrative boundaries that have no correspondence
on the ground, and whose source is almost always external and the sole
authority over the boundary.

In the particular case of water boundaries, I case see several actual use
cases:
1. Marine sanctuaries often don't allow personal watercraft. An OSM user
could use the map to stay outside of the boundaries.
2. Zero-discharge areas don't allow activities one would ordinarily
consider harmless, such as washing one's sailboat. An OpenSeaMap user could
sail outside of the boundary in that case.
3. The display of the NOAA Sanctuaries boundaries on OpenSeaMap (at least,
if not also on OpenStreetMaps) can help educate the public on the extent of
protected ocean areas. In the particular area we're interested in, nature
reserves are already marked on land -
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=10/37.7637/-122.5903

Based on these reasons, I think it would be useful to import the NOAA
Marine Sanctuaries data into OSM.

On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Ian Dees <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dan, OpenStreetMap's strength is that volunteers can verify the data by
> observing it on the ground. Boundaries imported from external sources,
> especially those in the water, are essentially "dead data" that cannot be
> improved upon unless the external data source changes the data. That sort
> of data isn't very useful to OSM and it's not my opinion that it shouldn't
> be in OSM.
>
_______________________________________________
Imports-us mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports-us

Reply via email to