Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On 2013-04-20 09:49, Clifford Snow wrote: I think I understand that the existing administrative levels dont work. In the US at least, the reservations have a domestic dependent nation status. They are not States, Counties yet contain cities. The often extend past state boundaries, and certainly county boundaries. perhaps we might look at australia? there are similar situations in that country for aboriginal land, with some level of autonomy within certain areas. i believe some reserves cross over state and county boundaries also -- robin http://universitywithoutconditions.ac.nz - Auckland's Free University ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On 21.04.2013 21:33, Clifford Snow wrote: On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: I still maintain Scotland, North Ireland and Wales are analogous situations You might then include Iraqi Kurdistan. I don't know how it is rendered, but it sounds very similar. Think the main problem is that we have to distinguish between the borders manifested by law and others. For example regions names or tribal/cultural areas often do not have a certain border and might even flow. If defined by law there are still major differences between countries. If administrative rights are involved it should fit within admin_level but noone prevents us to use more than one description (eg. admin_level plus protected_area. Yes, there should be no problem if the area crosses higher admin_level. cu colliar signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
Are there any reservations on or near the I-5/I-405 between Canada and Bellevue? I can divert on my way to Issaquah to attempt to ground truth some of this. From: Clifford Snow [mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us] Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2013 10:55 PM To: Paul Norman Cc: Talk Openstreetmap; Paul Johnson Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: I cant speak for the US, but tagging of them in BC was set back by people pushing the view that they should be tagged as provinces. There were also issues that someone imported a bunch without geometry or tag cleanup. In the US, Federally recognized tribes seem to be somewhere equal to state or higher, thus admin level 3 would seem more appropriate. But then there are cases where the the tribe occupies a small city. Question, how does the admin level impact the rendering? That's definitely the wrong question to be asking - whatever is appropriate, it almost certainly isn't going to be rendered by osm.org mapnik as-is. The fact that they generally cross admin_level=* boundary=administrative boundaries and those boundaries cross them is a pretty strong indication that theyre orthogonal to admin_level boundary. I agree. If they're orthogonal, then why are we trying to shoehorn them into admin_level=* boundary=administrative? There is a strong assumption that admin_level=N areas are geometrically admin_level=M areas, where NM. Or alternately stated, cities are in states. While there are some exceptions to this, this proposal would break that in almost every case. AFAIK, reservations are pretty much unique to Canada, the US and Australia. Oddly enough, Ive been to all of those countries. Lived in two, but not Australia. What about New Zealand for example the Maori? Because of treaties, how we tag the boundaries, may be universal. Ah yes, I was wondering about NZ. In any case, reservations definitely are not world-wide. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
hi, ... Reservation-boundary might cross a first admin boundary, so two admin=3's might cross/hit oneself. You need to establish for these meta-state situation a distinction-term - or create a seperate boundary system - or make-up the admin-levels by adding more levels (f.e. 40-49) - like in protected_areas. And even reservations might hit eachother(?). This protected_areas-key is, where you have to act in any way different than usually - where you have to take care, change your behavior (no photo), because of named *local* policies. A Reservation is located in state(s), which give or takes sovereignty (domestic dependent nation). A reservation is no province - but it might become one ... and doesn't mean the distribution area of an ethnic group. With these class=24 you have a clear seperate key. Question is, if one level is enought: With a use of Relations, you can too combine scattered tribal lands and too seperate zones within one level - so OSM don´t has to stand by with a long number of levels, what is to be avoided (I heard), if you think of possible global ideas. zone example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1749699 best, tshrub ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: Are there any reservations on or near the I-5/I-405 between Canada and Bellevue? I can divert on my way to Issaquah to attempt to ground truth some of this. You'll drive next to the Tulalip Indian Reservation starting at about 116th Street NE, North of Marysville. I drove through the reservation yesterday. I came in from the north on a state road and left the reservation somewhere near Marysville. No road signage to tell me when I entered. I prior knowledge of the rough boundaries of the reservation. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Apr 21, 2013 12:29 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: It's a little bit of a chicken/egg thing right now. As far as I'm aware, rendering of tribal nations went offline in mapnik around the time I pointed out the overly broad tagging and that having most of Oklahoma and big chunks of New Mexico hatched in white on green IR (had the former tagging scheme been used on all 200+ such territories in North America) would have been awkward and was misleading due to the nearly identical NR hatch of nature reserves circa summer 2010 when I moved my geographic focus to indian country. Is rendering the issue or tagging? Yes. You provoked me to look further. I found a level 4 admin boundary with a boundary:type of aboriginal_lands for the Hoopa Valley Tribe. Previously I was only looking for a name with the work reservation. It was just added August 4, 2012, relatively recently. I think your suggestion of a level 3 or 5 would be more appropriate. At first glance it looked like the Six Rivers National Forest, but it actually the Tribal boundaries. I wonder if someone would be willing to make a proper proposal for 3 and 5. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: I wonder if someone would be willing to make a proper proposal for 3 and 5. I'd be willing, but not after more research. I think we need to fully understand the autonomy of tribes and how exactly they fit into the governments. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote: On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.orgwrote: I wonder if someone would be willing to make a proper proposal for 3 and 5. I'd be willing, but not after more research. I think we need to fully understand the autonomy of tribes and how exactly they fit into the governments. Fine by me! I'd rather wait a while longer and get it right rather than broadstroke it incorrectly like some other maps. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
Am 21/apr/2013 um 19:59 schrieb Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org: Is rendering the issue or tagging? Yes. IMHO we should get the tagging right and rendering will follow. As we don't have similar situations in Europe it is unlikely that this is already implemented cheers, Martin___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote: In the US, Federally recognized tribes seem to be somewhere equal to state or higher, thus admin level 3 would seem more appropriate. But then there are cases where the the tribe occupies a small city. Question, how does the admin level impact the rendering? Currently, not much, other than adding another dotted, dashed or some combination of the two line on the map at the border, with no internal hatch, with lower admin levels disappearing the farther you zoom out. Granted, I understand there may be some concern that states may look strange with higher-than-state borders on the map overlapping, but I'm not entirely sympathetic to the argument: Are we trying to map for accurate status, or are we mapping to make it look like every other map that just ignores these jurisdictions? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 21/apr/2013 um 19:59 schrieb Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org: Is rendering the issue or tagging? Yes. IMHO we should get the tagging right and rendering will follow. As we don't have similar situations in Europe it is unlikely that this is already implemented I still maintain Scotland, North Ireland and Wales are analogous situations. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: I still maintain Scotland, North Ireland and Wales are analogous situations You might then include Iraqi Kurdistan. I don't know how it is rendered, but it sounds very similar. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
... hi, here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=protected_area something is prepared. may be boundary=protected_area + protect_class=24 + protection_title=... best, tshrub ___ talk mailing list talk at openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
OK, but would you apply this to Scotland and Wales? Because that's an analogous situation in the UK. On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 8:33 AM, tshrub my-email-confirmat...@online.dewrote: ... hi, here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=protected_area something is prepared. may be boundary=protected_area + protect_class=24 + protection_title=... best, tshrub ___ talk mailing list talk at openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
Paul Johnson baloo at ursamundi.org writes: OK, but would you apply this to Scotland and Wales? Because that's an analogous situation in the UK. basic is, to mark the reservation situation worldwide by two tags - to become rendered (once). A fine tuning you have to align by additional keys; there are some proposed, for collecting important data - like zones, or something like no photos (don´t know yet, if a tag like that already exists). a boundary=protected_area is running beside a boundary=administrative (line-bundle). I'm from the continent, but 'think, I would apply this to Scotland and Wales :) examples: russ: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/178596361 colum: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/102574866 ... best, tshrub ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On 2013-04-20 19:24, Paul Johnson wrote: OK, but would you apply this to Scotland and Wales? Because that's an analogous situation in the UK. Not really. Scotland/England/Wales are clearly administrative boundaries, and they are tagged as such in OSM. And they fit in the hierarchy of admin levels, ie below national boundaries, above council areas etc. They are comparable to states in the USA. So not relevant to tagging Native American lands. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: As previously stated, admin levels 3 and 5 depending on status as a nation or reservation, respectively. Looking at the admin levels, I agree 3 and 5 would appear to fit. But boundary=domestic_dependent_nation (not a currently accepted tag, just a place holder) would eliminate problems of which admin level the boundary is assigned. I don't care for the term aboriginal_lands as proposed on the wiki. I don't believe we need to tag small tribal lands when they are remote from the main tribal boundary. However, I don't have any good examples to offer. One part of my original message I still need help with. Why aren't we adding these boundaries to OSM? If it is just that no one as added any or is there an issue I'm not aware of? Personally I'd like to start adding in these boundaries, at least in the US and then only for geographical areas I'm familiar with. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Apr 20, 2013 7:23 PM, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm wrote: On 2013-04-20 19:24, Paul Johnson wrote: OK, but would you apply this to Scotland and Wales? Because that's an analogous situation in the UK. Not really. Scotland/England/Wales are clearly administrative boundaries, and they are tagged as such in OSM. And they fit in the hierarchy of admin levels, ie below national boundaries, above council areas etc. They are comparable to states in the USA. So not relevant to tagging Native American lands. It is entirely relevant, because Native American nations are, for almost all practical purposes, either above the county level or the state level to try to shoehorn it into that hierarchy. They have their own laws, levy their own taxes, run their own courts, schools, jails, road authorities, police, issue license plates, and in a few even more sovereign examples, issue internationally recognized passports and have their own militia forces. They're even recognized as independent in the US constitution, and analogous UK situations just aren't running into this debate. I'm having trouble grasping why this situation is different from autonomous and sovereign regions within the national boundaries of another state are somehow special or different on this continent than on every other continent. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Apr 20, 2013 8:53 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: One part of my original message I still need help with. Why aren't we adding these boundaries to OSM? If it is just that no one as added any or is there an issue I'm not aware of? Personally I'd like to start adding in these boundaries, at least in the US and then only for geographical areas I'm familiar with. It's a little bit of a chicken/egg thing right now. As far as I'm aware, rendering of tribal nations went offline in mapnik around the time I pointed out the overly broad tagging and that having most of Oklahoma and big chunks of New Mexico hatched in white on green IR (had the former tagging scheme been used on all 200+ such territories in North America) would have been awkward and was misleading due to the nearly identical NR hatch of nature reserves circa summer 2010 when I moved my geographic focus to indian country. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
I can't speak for the US, but tagging of them in BC was set back by people pushing the view that they should be tagged as provinces. There were also issues that someone imported a bunch without geometry or tag cleanup. The fact that they generally cross admin_level=* boundary=administrative boundaries and those boundaries cross them is a pretty strong indication that they're orthogonal to admin_level boundary. AFAIK, reservations are pretty much unique to Canada, the US and Australia. Oddly enough, I've been to all of those countries. From: Clifford Snow [mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us] Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2013 6:54 PM To: Paul Johnson Cc: Talk Openstreetmap Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries One part of my original message I still need help with. Why aren't we adding these boundaries to OSM? If it is just that no one as added any or is there an issue I'm not aware of? Personally I'd like to start adding in these boundaries, at least in the US and then only for geographical areas I'm familiar with. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: It's a little bit of a chicken/egg thing right now. As far as I'm aware, rendering of tribal nations went offline in mapnik around the time I pointed out the overly broad tagging and that having most of Oklahoma and big chunks of New Mexico hatched in white on green IR (had the former tagging scheme been used on all 200+ such territories in North America) would have been awkward and was misleading due to the nearly identical NR hatch of nature reserves circa summer 2010 when I moved my geographic focus to indian country. Is rendering the issue or tagging? You provoked me to look further. I found a level 4 admin boundary with a boundary:type of aboriginal_lands for the Hoopa Valley Tribe. Previously I was only looking for a name with the work reservation. It was just added August 4, 2012, relatively recently. I think your suggestion of a level 3 or 5 would be more appropriate. At first glance it looked like the Six Rivers National Forest, but it actually the Tribal boundaries. Hoopa Valley Tribe http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.0997lon=-123.6757zoom=12layers=M -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: I can’t speak for the US, but tagging of them in BC was set back by people pushing the view that they should be tagged as provinces. There were also issues that someone imported a bunch without geometry or tag cleanup. In the US, Federally recognized tribes seem to be somewhere equal to state or higher, thus admin level 3 would seem more appropriate. But then there are cases where the the tribe occupies a small city. Question, how does the admin level impact the rendering? The fact that they generally cross admin_level=* boundary=administrative boundaries and those boundaries cross them is a pretty strong indication that they’re orthogonal to admin_level boundary. I agree. AFAIK, reservations are pretty much unique to Canada, the US and Australia. Oddly enough, I’ve been to all of those countries. Lived in two, but not Australia. What about New Zealand for example the Maori? Because of treaties, how we tag the boundaries, may be universal. I'm planning to get in touch with a friend from a tribe in Alaska. I'm hoping that he might have good contacts to help me understand this better. I think he is out of the country on a holiday right now. -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
Looking at the wiki for help understanding why we don't have boundaries reservations has left me confused. Can someone explain why they are not there and if there is any plans to add them at some point in the future? From personal experience, it is important to know when you are on tribal lands. Often different laws apply. In one Southwest part of the US, you actually have to pay to take pictures on tribal lands. So knowing where you are is important. I think I understand that the existing administrative levels don't work. In the US at least, the reservations have a domestic dependent nation status. They are not States, Counties yet contain cities. The often extend past state boundaries, and certainly county boundaries. Thanks, -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
The previous tagging was inadequate, bordering on offensive (particularly with the rendering, which suggested indian nations and reservations were the same and more of a touristic draw than administratively significant). I've suggested using administrative level 3 and 5 for the purpose in north america, but this doesn't quite cover edge cases along national boundaries that don't apply to the indian nations in question; not sure if this might be a good or practical use for 1 or not. Either way, my idea for using these admin levels has been met with deafening silence. On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote: Looking at the wiki for help understanding why we don't have boundaries reservations has left me confused. Can someone explain why they are not there and if there is any plans to add them at some point in the future? From personal experience, it is important to know when you are on tribal lands. Often different laws apply. In one Southwest part of the US, you actually have to pay to take pictures on tribal lands. So knowing where you are is important. I think I understand that the existing administrative levels don't work. In the US at least, the reservations have a domestic dependent nation status. They are not States, Counties yet contain cities. The often extend past state boundaries, and certainly county boundaries. Thanks, -- Clifford OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
The previous tagging was inadequate, bordering on offensive
Which tagging was that?
It is my understanding that First Nations boundaries just don't fit within
the simple number-line model that OpenStreetMap has used for
boundary=administrative; admin_level={integer}.
boundary=aboriginal_lands
was used in 2010, based on donated data and little discussion. Is that the
inadequate, bordering on offensive tagging?
If it is acceptable, inoffensive and accurate, I'd be pleased to see that
tagging continue, or something like:
boundary=administrative, admin_level=first_nation / or some other value.
The rendering tools would have to catch up. It might not be rendered on
your favourite tile set, but it should be fully possible to make the data
up to date and accurate and complete to the best of our abilities. But it
seems that using an integer, or some fraction on the number line just won't
work.
One first nation[1] includes portions of what might otherwise be
considered, two admin_level=2s (USA and Canada) and three admin_level=4s
(New York state, Ontario province and Quebec province) and has been
described as a jurisdictional nightmare.
[1] http://www.akwesasne.ca/
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
The previous tagging was inadequate, bordering on offensive
Which tagging was that?
It is my understanding that First Nations boundaries just don't fit within
the simple number-line model that OpenStreetMap has used for
boundary=administrative; admin_level={integer}.
boundary=aboriginal_lands
was used in 2010, based on donated data and little discussion. Is that
the inadequate, bordering on offensive tagging?
If not that same tag, something in the same vein.
If it is acceptable, inoffensive and accurate, I'd be pleased to see that
tagging continue, or something like:
boundary=administrative, admin_level=first_nation / or some other value.
The rendering tools would have to catch up. It might not be rendered on
your favourite tile set, but it should be fully possible to make the data
up to date and accurate and complete to the best of our abilities. But it
seems that using an integer, or some fraction on the number line just won't
work.
One first nation[1] includes portions of what might otherwise be
considered, two admin_level=2s (USA and Canada) and three admin_level=4s
(New York state, Ontario province and Quebec province) and has been
described as a jurisdictional nightmare.
[1] http://www.akwesasne.ca/
Reservations and nations in general are jurisdictional nightmares, because
nations are autonomous and outside the legal jurisdiction of the US/Canada
and state/province governments on matters not outlined within their
treaties (and in theory could close their borders should relations sour to
such a degree for that to even begin to look practical); whereas
reservations are autonomous only within the realm of what's been agreed
upon by treaty and default to state and federal law when the reservation's
law doesn't exist. And then there's somewhat in between examples, such as
the Osage Nation, which is a reservation, but has probably the highest
degree of sovereignty of the tribes that wound up in reservation status.
They just don't really have much say in land matters). Akwesasne is just
an extreme example of the same situation that the Cherokee, Muscogee and
Chickasaw are in, to name a few examples I see daily (I live just a few
hundred meters north of the Cherokee/Muscogee border and I'm a 10 minute
car ride from the Cherokee/Osage and Osage/Muscogee borders; and within a 5
hour drive of approximately 60 similar borders).
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.orgwrote:
The previous tagging was inadequate, bordering on offensive
Which tagging was that?
It is my understanding that First Nations boundaries just don't fit
within the simple number-line model that OpenStreetMap has used for
boundary=administrative; admin_level={integer}.
boundary=aboriginal_lands
was used in 2010, based on donated data and little discussion. Is that
the inadequate, bordering on offensive tagging?
If not that same tag, something in the same vein.
What tagging do you suggest?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Native American/First Nation, etc. Reservation Boundaries
As previously stated, admin levels 3 and 5 depending on status as a nation
or reservation, respectively.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.orgwrote:
The previous tagging was inadequate, bordering on offensive
Which tagging was that?
It is my understanding that First Nations boundaries just don't fit
within the simple number-line model that OpenStreetMap has used for
boundary=administrative; admin_level={integer}.
boundary=aboriginal_lands
was used in 2010, based on donated data and little discussion. Is that
the inadequate, bordering on offensive tagging?
If not that same tag, something in the same vein.
What tagging do you suggest?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
