Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 07:56, Alan Mackie wrote: > On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 20:21, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: >> > On 1. Aug 2020, at 17:20, Alan Mackie wrote: >> > I don't know how I'd map this. Do you have to pass through border >> > checkpoints when you enter or leave the area? >> >> around here, no, but neither are there border checkpoints at the border of >> the main territory, you just walk there without noticing you are changing >> country (referring to the Vatican City) >> > In this instance I meant the Ahkwesáhsne / US / Canadian situation. Yeah but per the precedents of the Vatican, Monaco, the Schengen area, etc, a border checkpoint is not necessarily needed for a country border to exist and be acknowledged. Or for another European analogy, consider the Sápmi region inhabited by Sámi people and their relation to Nordic country borders. --Jarek ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 20:21, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > On 1. Aug 2020, at 17:20, Alan Mackie wrote: > > > > I don't know how I'd map this. Do you have to pass through border > checkpoints when you enter or leave the area? > > > around here, no, but neither are there border checkpoints at the border of > the main territory, you just walk there without noticing you are changing > country (referring to the Vatican City) > > In this instance I meant the Ahkwesáhsne / US / Canadian situation. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
sent from a phone > On 1. Aug 2020, at 17:20, Alan Mackie wrote: > > I don't know how I'd map this. Do you have to pass through border checkpoints > when you enter or leave the area? around here, no, but neither are there border checkpoints at the border of the main territory, you just walk there without noticing you are changing country (referring to the Vatican City) Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 at 19:56, Kevin Kenny wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 5:07 PM Alan Mackie wrote: > >> Many if not most of the entities mentioned in this discussion as being >> candidates for "admin level above country" do have geographic reach >> encompassing multiple countries, but are also limited in scope, often >> severely. To tag such a limited body as fully encompassing a higher admin >> level seems fundamentally flawed as a concept. If their powers were >> expanded to have unlimited scope within that geographic area you would >> effectively have a single larger country. Having an entity grow in scope >> from "admin levels that includes (largely) independent countries" down to >> admin level of a country seems counter to the general structure. >> > > The defining test probably has to be the power to engage in foreign > relations with entities at the same admin_level without deferring to the > next higher level. > > Possibly. My main thrust is that I think the top level, "doesn't formally have to defer to anyone", should share a common admin_level. The test as you have stated it fails in federal systems. In the US, at > least, the plenary power to govern belongs to the States (Or to the People, > but constitutionally this is enforced only by a requirement that each State > have a republican form of government.) The national government has only > those powers that are delegated to it from the states under the > Constitution. When it tries to exercise plenary jurisdiction (as, alas, > we're seeing nowadays!), it tends to unfold as a constitutional crisis. > The States are above the Federal government, not beneath it. > > The reason that this principle is not obvious from abroad is that the > States have delegated to the Federal government the sole power to engage in > foreign relations; a State may not engage in diplomacy abroad because the > States have relinquished that power. Which is why, when you arrive at JFK, > you clear US customs and not New York's. > > Above/below is often rather fuzzy when talking about systems with elections. An overwhelming majority of states need to ratify constitutional amendments for them to become effective, but as states representatives form the federal legislature that pass them anyway this seems like another path to the same conclusion (not that requiring multiple paths is a bad thing when it comes to big decisions). What may be relevant here is that states that vote against an amendment in congress and refuse to ratify the amendment when passed would still see powers transferred from them to the federal government. > By the way, a 'containment' test fails as well in the US. While there are > no municipal governments that cross state lines (there are some > special-purpose entities that do by the consent of both states and the > Congress, such as the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey), it's not > uncommon for a city to lie in more than one county, or a village in more > than one township. Having a clean hierarchy of admin_levels just isn't > important to USAians. > > I'm OK with higher admin levels cutting across lower ones or overlapping when they share jurisdictions. What may be useful is some way of recording who does what in broad, "visible to the mapper", categories. And I have Absolutely No Idea what to do with extraterritorial dependencies > or domestic dependent nations. > > Feel free to stop reading here. I'm going off topic. > > The nearest problem case to me is Ahkwesáhsne, a territory of > the Kanien'kehá:ka Nation of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy that straddles > the US-Canadian border, and whose government is recognized by neither > state. The political situation there has deteriorated into shootings as > recently as 1990, and sabre-rattling among US, Canadian and Akwesáhsro:non > persons as recently as 2009. The disputes usually stem from one or the > other large nation deciding to deny the Kanien'kehá free pratique to travel > and trade within their own nation, requiring customs and imposts every time > the US-Canadian border is crossed. > > I don't know how I'd map this. Do you have to pass through border checkpoints when you enter or leave the area? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 5:07 PM Alan Mackie wrote: > Many if not most of the entities mentioned in this discussion as being > candidates for "admin level above country" do have geographic reach > encompassing multiple countries, but are also limited in scope, often > severely. To tag such a limited body as fully encompassing a higher admin > level seems fundamentally flawed as a concept. If their powers were > expanded to have unlimited scope within that geographic area you would > effectively have a single larger country. Having an entity grow in scope > from "admin levels that includes (largely) independent countries" down to > admin level of a country seems counter to the general structure. > The defining test probably has to be the power to engage in foreign relations with entities at the same admin_level without deferring to the next higher level. The test as you have stated it fails in federal systems. In the US, at least, the plenary power to govern belongs to the States (Or to the People, but constitutionally this is enforced only by a requirement that each State have a republican form of government.) The national government has only those powers that are delegated to it from the states under the Constitution. When it tries to exercise plenary jurisdiction (as, alas, we're seeing nowadays!), it tends to unfold as a constitutional crisis. The States are above the Federal government, not beneath it. The reason that this principle is not obvious from abroad is that the States have delegated to the Federal government the sole power to engage in foreign relations; a State may not engage in diplomacy abroad because the States have relinquished that power. Which is why, when you arrive at JFK, you clear US customs and not New York's. By the way, a 'containment' test fails as well in the US. While there are no municipal governments that cross state lines (there are some special-purpose entities that do by the consent of both states and the Congress, such as the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey), it's not uncommon for a city to lie in more than one county, or a village in more than one township. Having a clean hierarchy of admin_levels just isn't important to USAians. And I have Absolutely No Idea what to do with extraterritorial dependencies or domestic dependent nations. Feel free to stop reading here. I'm going off topic. The nearest problem case to me is Ahkwesáhsne, a territory of the Kanien'kehá:ka Nation of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy that straddles the US-Canadian border, and whose government is recognized by neither state. The political situation there has deteriorated into shootings as recently as 1990, and sabre-rattling among US, Canadian and Akwesáhsro:non persons as recently as 2009. The disputes usually stem from one or the other large nation deciding to deny the Kanien'kehá free pratique to travel and trade within their own nation, requiring customs and imposts every time the US-Canadian border is crossed. -- 73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 19:59, Phake Nick wrote: > > > 在 2020年7月31日週五 00:24，Alan Mackie 寫道： > >> >> >> On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 16:38, Martin Koppenhoefer >> wrote: >> >>> Am Do., 30. Juli 2020 um 17:13 Uhr schrieb Alan Mackie < >>> aamac...@gmail.com>: >>> This is why I suggested that the more practical solution would probably be to re-tag all existing admin_level=2 with admin_level=1 except for the EU ones as there are far fewer elements to be updated. Arbitrarily deciding that the EU gets its own admin_level not used by other top level entities breaks consistency with the rest of the world for the sake of local pride. >>> >>> >>> which other top level entities are you getting at? Why should we not tag >>> these with the same tag? >>> >> >> Other independent nations, this is why I suggested the promotion of all >> other admin_level=2 if we went this rote >> > > admin_level=1 is by definition higher than national level. > According to the wiki, but current practice doesn't really use it for much beyond historic sites according to previous replies to this thread. At a practical level it mostly seems reserved for future use. I would say a historical example could be German Confederation, before the > unification of Germany > Another historical example could be the Communist Bloc, which is larger > than the Soviet Union. > It might also be useful to map the limit of power of other countries that > formally controls a number of tributary, vassal or proxy states beyond its > own border. > For the 'territories formerly known as colonies' that formally remain at least partly attached to their former ruling states a variety of levels are currently in use. The self governing ones seem to be tagged as admin_level=2, others as 3 or 4 depending on how they see themselves. At least in my non-scientific look at the ones that happened to pop into my head. These largely seem to have found their own solutions within OSM's existing tagging structure. Attempting to tag proxy states seems like taking political stances that OSM has historically tried to stay as far away from as possible. Many if not most of the entities mentioned in this discussion as being candidates for "admin level above country" do have geographic reach encompassing multiple countries, but are also limited in scope, often severely. To tag such a limited body as fully encompassing a higher admin level seems fundamentally flawed as a concept. If their powers were expanded to have unlimited scope within that geographic area you would effectively have a single larger country. Having an entity grow in scope from "admin levels that includes (largely) independent countries" down to admin level of a country seems counter to the general structure. ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
在 2020年7月31日週五 00:24，Alan Mackie 寫道： > > > On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 16:38, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > >> Am Do., 30. Juli 2020 um 17:13 Uhr schrieb Alan Mackie < >> aamac...@gmail.com>: >> >>> This is why I suggested that the more practical solution would probably >>> be to re-tag all existing admin_level=2 with admin_level=1 except for the >>> EU ones as there are far fewer elements to be updated. Arbitrarily deciding >>> that the EU gets its own admin_level not used by other top level entities >>> breaks consistency with the rest of the world for the sake of local pride. >>> >> >> >> which other top level entities are you getting at? Why should we not tag >> these with the same tag? >> > > Other independent nations, this is why I suggested the promotion of all > other admin_level=2 if we went this rote > admin_level=1 is by definition higher than national level. I would say a historical example could be German Confederation, before the unification of Germany Another historical example could be the Communist Bloc, which is larger than the Soviet Union. It might also be useful to map the limit of power of other countries that formally controls a number of tributary, vassal or proxy states beyond its own border. > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
Martin Koppenhoefer: > > > sent from a phone > >> On 30. Jul 2020, at 14:04, Frederik Ramm wrote: >> >> To me as a citizen of a EU country it does not feel like the EU is a >> higher-level administrative body than the country. Yes, countries have >> decided to contractually transfer some rights and responsibilities to >> the EU but that doesn't (in my mind) mean the EU is some form of >> super-state. Quitting the EU if you don't like it is much easier than >> seceding from a country. > > > To me it is not a question how easy it is for a nation to leave the > supranational entity. The EU does have legislative and jurisdictional powers > above the member countries, Yes. > guidelines they issue have to be converted into national law, directives have to. EU regulations are immediately enforceable > and the European Court is above the national courts. > > Cheers Martin > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Niels Elgaard Larsen ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 16:38, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Am Do., 30. Juli 2020 um 17:13 Uhr schrieb Alan Mackie >: > >> This is why I suggested that the more practical solution would probably >> be to re-tag all existing admin_level=2 with admin_level=1 except for the >> EU ones as there are far fewer elements to be updated. Arbitrarily deciding >> that the EU gets its own admin_level not used by other top level entities >> breaks consistency with the rest of the world for the sake of local pride. >> > > > which other top level entities are you getting at? Why should we not tag > these with the same tag? > Other independent nations, this is why I suggested the promotion of all other admin_level=2 if we went this route. > Actually, admin_level=1 is already quite established, just with a > different key: heritage=1 (for UN heritage sites) > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/heritage=1#map > > > >> >> The EU is not the only entity that has arisen by agreement of neighbours >> to clump together, in that respect it is only unique in that it is the most >> populous one that happens to be doing so at this particular point in time. >> > > > you are of course free to add the past ones in OHM ;-) > > I think most of the surviving ones are already in OSM as admin_level=2. A more radical approach would be to drop admin_level entirely and rely on the way the relations are nested. However, I imagine the thought of processing that would reduce all but the most stoic of data consumers to tears, not to mention the fragility of mapping this way, the difficulty in doing so with OSM's typical philosophy of incremental improvement and the myriad of problems that results when borders are fuzzy and hard to pin down. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
30 Jul 2020, 14:33 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl: > > On 2020-07-30 14:02, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > >> Hi, >> >> On 30.07.20 13:32, Colin Smale wrote: >> >>> The EU is «composed-of» whole member states. It has all the attributes >>> of a governmental administrative body - with the executive, parliament >>> and justicial branches impacting citizens directly. >>> >> >> To me as a citizen of a EU country it does not feel like the EU is a >> higher-level administrative body than the country. Yes, countries have >> decided to contractually transfer some rights and responsibilities to >> the EU but that doesn't (in my mind) mean the EU is some form of >> super-state. Quitting the EU if you don't like it is much easier than >> seceding from a country. >> >> > Ask the Brits how easy it is to leave... > > You might not like it, but the EU is already a super-state that acts as one, > with a federation of states below. > It is not so simple.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
Am Do., 30. Juli 2020 um 17:13 Uhr schrieb Alan Mackie : > This is why I suggested that the more practical solution would probably be > to re-tag all existing admin_level=2 with admin_level=1 except for the EU > ones as there are far fewer elements to be updated. Arbitrarily deciding > that the EU gets its own admin_level not used by other top level entities > breaks consistency with the rest of the world for the sake of local pride. > which other top level entities are you getting at? Why should we not tag these with the same tag? Actually, admin_level=1 is already quite established, just with a different key: heritage=1 (for UN heritage sites) https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/heritage=1#map > > The EU is not the only entity that has arisen by agreement of neighbours > to clump together, in that respect it is only unique in that it is the most > populous one that happens to be doing so at this particular point in time. > you are of course free to add the past ones in OHM ;-) > Of course every entity is unique in its own special way, but the > uniqueness of individual trees and mountains doesn't stop us from > attempting consistent tagging. > +1 cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 15:02, Colin Smale wrote: > On 2020-07-30 15:05, Alan Mackie wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 13:35, Colin Smale wrote: > >> On 2020-07-30 14:02, Frederik Ramm wrote:You might not like it, but the >> EU is already a super-state that acts as one, with a federation of states >> below. I know the whole idea of a "United States of Europe" and a formal >> federal constitution is toxic, but basically we are already there. What is >> left to do is to remove the opt-outs and other exceptional treatment >> afforded to certain states. >> > > If this is truly the case then we already have a label for this: > admin_level=2 (but see below). > > > The absolute number of the admin_level is less relevant than the relative > position in the hierarchy. The level for the EU must be above (i.e. > numerically lower) than the level of its members. If the EU comes in at > level 2, then the member states would have to go to level 3 or 4; as many > countries already use these levels, it could cause an avalanche of changes > and cause the tagging in Europe to get unacceptably out of step with the > rest of the world. The EU is a unique construct, so it should not be > surprising if it needs a unique solution in OSM. > This is why I suggested that the more practical solution would probably be to re-tag all existing admin_level=2 with admin_level=1 except for the EU ones as there are far fewer elements to be updated. Arbitrarily deciding that the EU gets its own admin_level not used by other top level entities breaks consistency with the rest of the world for the sake of local pride. The EU is not the only entity that has arisen by agreement of neighbours to clump together, in that respect it is only unique in that it is the most populous one that happens to be doing so at this particular point in time. Of course every entity is unique in its own special way, but the uniqueness of individual trees and mountains doesn't stop us from attempting consistent tagging. > > > I would prefer to map the EU as a contract than as an administrative >> boundary. There are many such contracts around the world, where smaller >> countries pool their defense or other typically national capabilities, >> and I would not be surprised if there were situations where countries >> pool their defense with one group, and their currency with another. >> Mapping these things as "areas on the map" is old-style cartographic >> thinking. We can do better than that. >> >> The EU has laws with direct effect, which override national laws. This >> pooling of capabilities you refer to would not have any laws of its own - >> only treaties between countries, which may implement certain measures in >> their national laws as a consequence. The EU is not like that, it has its >> own laws, that our representatives get to vote on. >> > EU directives generally have to be transposed into national law by all the > member states. IIRC it is the copy-pasted law that theoretically holds the > power even though the members have all agreed to run everything through the > photocopier. Whether this is a tangible thing or just a figleaf is for the > lawyers to fight over. > > > No, it is extremely clear that some EU directives have direct effect, > without any action being required from the member states. > > https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al14547 > >From the link above: " This principle only relates to certain European acts. Furthermore, it is subject to several conditions." So only certain things, the rest continue to behave largely as if the states had developed them individually. > > >> Even *if* a boundary was mapped, it would probably more pragmatic to map >> the outer boundary of the Schengen region than the outer boundary of the >> EU states. >> >> The Schengen region is DEFINITELY not an admin boundary. It does not >> actually exist in a tangible form, only as EU law and treaties of >> association on paper. It covers only part of the EU, and several non-EU >> territories. >> > I disagree with this, the agents at the border are very tangible. > > > The agents at the border don't work for "Schengen" - they work for their > national organisations. There is no "Schengen" to employ them. What I meant > by tangible was some kind of organisation with people and offices. It also > doesn't have its own rules and regulations - they are now part of the aquis > communitaire. Changes to "Schengen rules" are just EU law changes like any > other. Speaking of border agents, it is actually the absence of such agents > (on the internal borders) that characterises Schengen; the presence of > immigration officers at the outer boundary just makes it like any "normal" > international border. > By the first part of this argument: the EU shouldn't be mapped either because no one works for an organisation named "Lisbon". By the second: the presence or absence of border agents (or their facilities) along a border, (or equivalent
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On 2020-07-30 15:05, Alan Mackie wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 13:35, Colin Smale wrote: > >> On 2020-07-30 14:02, Frederik Ramm wrote:You might not like it, but the EU >> is already a super-state that acts as one, with a federation of states >> below. I know the whole idea of a "United States of Europe" and a formal >> federal constitution is toxic, but basically we are already there. What is >> left to do is to remove the opt-outs and other exceptional treatment >> afforded to certain states. > If this is truly the case then we already have a label for this: > admin_level=2 (but see below). The absolute number of the admin_level is less relevant than the relative position in the hierarchy. The level for the EU must be above (i.e. numerically lower) than the level of its members. If the EU comes in at level 2, then the member states would have to go to level 3 or 4; as many countries already use these levels, it could cause an avalanche of changes and cause the tagging in Europe to get unacceptably out of step with the rest of the world. The EU is a unique construct, so it should not be surprising if it needs a unique solution in OSM. > I would prefer to map the EU as a contract than as an administrative > boundary. There are many such contracts around the world, where smaller > countries pool their defense or other typically national capabilities, > and I would not be surprised if there were situations where countries > pool their defense with one group, and their currency with another. > Mapping these things as "areas on the map" is old-style cartographic > thinking. We can do better than that. > The EU has laws with direct effect, which override national laws. This > pooling of capabilities you refer to would not have any laws of its own - > only treaties between countries, which may implement certain measures in > their national laws as a consequence. The EU is not like that, it has its own > laws, that our representatives get to vote on. EU directives generally have to be transposed into national law by all the member states. IIRC it is the copy-pasted law that theoretically holds the power even though the members have all agreed to run everything through the photocopier. Whether this is a tangible thing or just a figleaf is for the lawyers to fight over. No, it is extremely clear that some EU directives have direct effect, without any action being required from the member states. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al14547 > Even *if* a boundary was mapped, it would probably more pragmatic to map > the outer boundary of the Schengen region than the outer boundary of the > EU states. > The Schengen region is DEFINITELY not an admin boundary. It does not > actually exist in a tangible form, only as EU law and treaties of association > on paper. It covers only part of the EU, and several non-EU territories. I disagree with this, the agents at the border are very tangible. The agents at the border don't work for "Schengen" - they work for their national organisations. There is no "Schengen" to employ them. What I meant by tangible was some kind of organisation with people and offices. It also doesn't have its own rules and regulations - they are now part of the aquis communitaire. Changes to "Schengen rules" are just EU law changes like any other. Speaking of border agents, it is actually the absence of such agents (on the internal borders) that characterises Schengen; the presence of immigration officers at the outer boundary just makes it like any "normal" international border. (This is why a new EU member state would not have to sign up to Schengen - it would be automatic on accession. If you wanted an opt-out you would have to negotiate for that)___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 14:33, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 30. Jul 2020, at 14:41, Alan Mackie wrote: > > > > To me pooling resources does not generate a higher level entity, it > rearranges existing ones. If the EU does become the "final decider" across > all branches of government, then to me it becomes the admin_level=2 entity > and the states that form it become "lower level" entities. > > > the final decider across some branches of government can also be a lower > entity than the country level, eg states or German Bundesländer in federal > systems. > The agreement to leave powers to smaller entities still normally recorded in law or legal ruling at the "next level up" though? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
sent from a phone > On 30. Jul 2020, at 14:41, Alan Mackie wrote: > > To me pooling resources does not generate a higher level entity, it > rearranges existing ones. If the EU does become the "final decider" across > all branches of government, then to me it becomes the admin_level=2 entity > and the states that form it become "lower level" entities. the final decider across some branches of government can also be a lower entity than the country level, eg states or German Bundesländer in federal systems. Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
sent from a phone > On 30. Jul 2020, at 14:04, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > To me as a citizen of a EU country it does not feel like the EU is a > higher-level administrative body than the country. Yes, countries have > decided to contractually transfer some rights and responsibilities to > the EU but that doesn't (in my mind) mean the EU is some form of > super-state. Quitting the EU if you don't like it is much easier than > seceding from a country. To me it is not a question how easy it is for a nation to leave the supranational entity. The EU does have legislative and jurisdictional powers above the member countries, guidelines they issue have to be converted into national law, and the European Court is above the national courts. Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 13:35, Colin Smale wrote: > On 2020-07-30 14:02, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Hi, > > On 30.07.20 13:32, Colin Smale wrote: > > The EU is «composed-of» whole member states. It has all the attributes > of a governmental administrative body - with the executive, parliament > and justicial branches impacting citizens directly. > > > To me as a citizen of a EU country it does not feel like the EU is a > higher-level administrative body than the country. Yes, countries have > decided to contractually transfer some rights and responsibilities to > the EU but that doesn't (in my mind) mean the EU is some form of > super-state. Quitting the EU if you don't like it is much easier than > seceding from a country. > > > Ask the Brits how easy it is to leave... > I think it's a great deal easier than it would be for e.g. California to succeed from their union. Easier is not the same as easy. You might not like it, but the EU is already a super-state that acts as > one, with a federation of states below. I know the whole idea of a "United > States of Europe" and a formal federal constitution is toxic, but basically > we are already there. What is left to do is to remove the opt-outs and > other exceptional treatment afforded to certain states. > If this is truly the case then we already have a label for this: admin_level=2 (but see below). > I would prefer to map the EU as a contract than as an administrative > boundary. There are many such contracts around the world, where smaller > countries pool their defense or other typically national capabilities, > and I would not be surprised if there were situations where countries > pool their defense with one group, and their currency with another. > Mapping these things as "areas on the map" is old-style cartographic > thinking. We can do better than that. > > > The EU has laws with direct effect, which override national laws. This > pooling of capabilities you refer to would not have any laws of its own - > only treaties between countries, which may implement certain measures in > their national laws as a consequence. The EU is not like that, it has its > own laws, that our representatives get to vote on. > > EU directives generally have to be transposed into national law by all the member states. IIRC it is the copy-pasted law that theoretically holds the power even though the members have all agreed to run everything through the photocopier. Whether this is a tangible thing or just a figleaf is for the lawyers to fight over. > Even *if* a boundary was mapped, it would probably more pragmatic to map > the outer boundary of the Schengen region than the outer boundary of the > EU states. > > The Schengen region is DEFINITELY not an admin boundary. It does not > actually exist in a tangible form, only as EU law and treaties of > association on paper. It covers only part of the EU, and several non-EU > territories. > > I disagree with this, the agents at the border are very tangible. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 13:05, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 30.07.20 13:32, Colin Smale wrote: > > The EU is «composed-of» whole member states. It has all the attributes > > of a governmental administrative body - with the executive, parliament > > and justicial branches impacting citizens directly. > > To me as a citizen of a EU country it does not feel like the EU is a > higher-level administrative body than the country. Yes, countries have > decided to contractually transfer some rights and responsibilities to > the EU but that doesn't (in my mind) mean the EU is some form of > super-state. Quitting the EU if you don't like it is much easier than > seceding from a country. > To me pooling resources does not generate a higher level entity, it rearranges existing ones. If the EU does become the "final decider" across all branches of government, then to me it becomes the admin_level=2 entity and the states that form it become "lower level" entities. In practical terms it would probably be easier at that point to give them admin_level=1 and automatically retag all non-EU admin_level=2 entities as admin_level=1 (~250?) rather than running through every admin boundary within the EU and adding 1 to it (thousands?). After all, in many countries, the admin_levels are already rather sparse so having a gap between 1 and 3 shouldn't be too much of an issue. This doesn't seem like a thing that will need to happen for another couple of decades if it happens at all. > I would prefer to map the EU as a contract than as an administrative > boundary. There are many such contracts around the world, where smaller > countries pool their defense or other typically national capabilities, > and I would not be surprised if there were situations where countries > pool their defense with one group, and their currency with another. > Mapping these things as "areas on the map" is old-style cartographic > thinking. We can do better than that. > > Even *if* a boundary was mapped, it would probably more pragmatic to map > the outer boundary of the Schengen region than the outer boundary of the > EU states. > I think it would be useful to have distinct tagging for these types of agreements, I know of at least one other currency union, and I can imagine a map of what you need in your wallet might come in handy for travellers. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On 2020-07-30 14:02, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 30.07.20 13:32, Colin Smale wrote: > >> The EU is «composed-of» whole member states. It has all the attributes >> of a governmental administrative body - with the executive, parliament >> and justicial branches impacting citizens directly. > > To me as a citizen of a EU country it does not feel like the EU is a > higher-level administrative body than the country. Yes, countries have > decided to contractually transfer some rights and responsibilities to > the EU but that doesn't (in my mind) mean the EU is some form of > super-state. Quitting the EU if you don't like it is much easier than > seceding from a country. Ask the Brits how easy it is to leave... You might not like it, but the EU is already a super-state that acts as one, with a federation of states below. I know the whole idea of a "United States of Europe" and a formal federal constitution is toxic, but basically we are already there. What is left to do is to remove the opt-outs and other exceptional treatment afforded to certain states. > I would prefer to map the EU as a contract than as an administrative > boundary. There are many such contracts around the world, where smaller > countries pool their defense or other typically national capabilities, > and I would not be surprised if there were situations where countries > pool their defense with one group, and their currency with another. > Mapping these things as "areas on the map" is old-style cartographic > thinking. We can do better than that. The EU has laws with direct effect, which override national laws. This pooling of capabilities you refer to would not have any laws of its own - only treaties between countries, which may implement certain measures in their national laws as a consequence. The EU is not like that, it has its own laws, that our representatives get to vote on. On the other hand, if you are actually questioning the inclusion of administrative boundaries in OSM as a basic principle, that would be a different can of worms entirely. > Even *if* a boundary was mapped, it would probably more pragmatic to map > the outer boundary of the Schengen region than the outer boundary of the > EU states. The Schengen region is DEFINITELY not an admin boundary. It does not actually exist in a tangible form, only as EU law and treaties of association on paper. It covers only part of the EU, and several non-EU territories.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
> Quitting the EU if you don't like it is much easier thanseceding from a country.I don't follow this reasoning since some people will always leave their country behind and begin a new life somewhere else. That was just how the US was founded, founded by ones from Europe mostly who broke up with their formally country in the hope of a better life.And quitting the EU is not easy because in a democracy it is not easy to gain the single vote of a majority e.g. to leave the EU. And also the complexity of the contracts with the EU don't make this easy. See United Kingdom and they don't have the problem of having to switch currency since they use their own one already.I would rather say that the EU is a suber administrative boundary which belongs to OSM as a relation with admin_level=1 with all the EU countries as its members.~ Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram Original Message Subject: Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?From: Frederik Ramm To: tagging@openstreetmap.orgCC: Hi,On 30.07.20 13:32, Colin Smale wrote:> The EU is «composed-of» whole member states. It has all the attributes> of a governmental administrative body - with the executive, parliament> and justicial branches impacting citizens directly.To me as a citizen of a EU country it does not feel like the EU is ahigher-level administrative body than the country. Yes, countries havedecided to contractually transfer some rights and responsibilities tothe EU but that doesn't (in my mind) mean the EU is some form ofsuper-state. Quitting the EU if you don't like it is much easier thanseceding from a country.I would prefer to map the EU as a contract than as an administrativeboundary. There are many such contracts around the world, where smallercountries pool their defense or other typically national capabilities,and I would not be surprised if there were situations where countriespool their defense with one group, and their currency with another.Mapping these things as "areas on the map" is old-style cartographicthinking. We can do better than that.Even *if* a boundary was mapped, it would probably more pragmatic to mapthe outer boundary of the Schengen region than the outer boundary of theEU states.ByeFrederik-- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"___Tagging mailing listTagging@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
Hi, On 30.07.20 13:32, Colin Smale wrote: > The EU is «composed-of» whole member states. It has all the attributes > of a governmental administrative body - with the executive, parliament > and justicial branches impacting citizens directly. To me as a citizen of a EU country it does not feel like the EU is a higher-level administrative body than the country. Yes, countries have decided to contractually transfer some rights and responsibilities to the EU but that doesn't (in my mind) mean the EU is some form of super-state. Quitting the EU if you don't like it is much easier than seceding from a country. I would prefer to map the EU as a contract than as an administrative boundary. There are many such contracts around the world, where smaller countries pool their defense or other typically national capabilities, and I would not be surprised if there were situations where countries pool their defense with one group, and their currency with another. Mapping these things as "areas on the map" is old-style cartographic thinking. We can do better than that. Even *if* a boundary was mapped, it would probably more pragmatic to map the outer boundary of the Schengen region than the outer boundary of the EU states. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
IMO the logic behind putting the EU as admin_level=1 would have meant that the United States of America, the USSR and Australia would have been made admin_level=1 when they were formed from their preceding entities (if OSM had existed at those times). I would suggest that contrary to the preceding thread: if and when the EU becomes as unified as the above examples it would make more sense to put the EU as a whole as admin_level=2 and add one to all boundaries of the states and subareas already mapped within it. On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 10:40, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 30.07.20 11:19, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > > Unlike such objects EU has (AFAIK) well defined border, matching > > existing administrative boundaries, so problems inherent in > > mapping fuzzy objects are not present. > > I'm not an expert on international treaties but I believe that if France > bought Alaska from the US tomorrow, then Alaska would become part of the > EU, without the EU having much of a say in it, isn't that so? > > This is of course a very hypothetical example but little swaps of > un-inhabited land happen between neighbouring countries from time to > time. The "EU boundary" is the sum of whatever national boundaries its > member states have. Same with the "Schengen area" which is guarded by > Frontex which you linked to; it's a construct that is the result of a > contract but not an administrative area. > > > I am not opposing it and it seems defensible. > > Anything is, on this mailing list ;) > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
Hi, On 30.07.20 11:19, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > Unlike such objects EU has (AFAIK) well defined border, matching > existing administrative boundaries, so problems inherent in > mapping fuzzy objects are not present. I'm not an expert on international treaties but I believe that if France bought Alaska from the US tomorrow, then Alaska would become part of the EU, without the EU having much of a say in it, isn't that so? This is of course a very hypothetical example but little swaps of un-inhabited land happen between neighbouring countries from time to time. The "EU boundary" is the sum of whatever national boundaries its member states have. Same with the "Schengen area" which is guarded by Frontex which you linked to; it's a construct that is the result of a contract but not an administrative area. > I am not opposing it and it seems defensible. Anything is, on this mailing list ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
Jul 30, 2020, 09:44 by frede...@remote.org: > in my view, the EU is not an administrative body with a border and many > parts (countries), but instead the countries have made a contract to > form the EU. > EU is in a weird state where it is sort of organization of countries sort of administrative body with borders. see mentioned Lisbon treaty see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Border_and_Coast_Guard_Agency > I would therefore object to mapping the EU as an entity with a boundary; > I am not opposing it and it seems defensible. > I know there's a tendency among some mappers to try and map > multipolygons or administrative boundaries for anything that has a name, > but that practice is not helpful. I don't even dare to look but I > wouldn't be surprised if some helpful soul has meanwhile decided to map > "the Atlantic", "the Pacific", or "Eurasia", assembling thousands of > little coastline pieces into giant relations in painstaking, week-long > work... sigh. > Unlike such objects EU has (AFAIK) well defined border, matching existing administrative boundaries, so problems inherent in mapping fuzzy objects are not present. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
On 30/07/2020 09:44, Frederik Ramm wrote: in my view, the EU is not an administrative body with a border and many parts (countries), but instead the countries have made a contract to form the EU. The Treaty of Lisbon gave the EU it's own “legal personality”, so the EU, as a body itself is now able to sign international treaties etc. But since there's only 1 EU, I don't see the pupose of putting it into OSM. Anyone who needs that data can create it easily. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Should admin_level=1 tag be applied to EU?
Hi, in my view, the EU is not an administrative body with a border and many parts (countries), but instead the countries have made a contract to form the EU. I would therefore object to mapping the EU as an entity with a boundary; instead, if it were mapped, I would expect it to be a relation of yet-to-be-defined type and having the individual member states as relation members. I know there's a tendency among some mappers to try and map multipolygons or administrative boundaries for anything that has a name, but that practice is not helpful. I don't even dare to look but I wouldn't be surprised if some helpful soul has meanwhile decided to map "the Atlantic", "the Pacific", or "Eurasia", assembling thousands of little coastline pieces into giant relations in painstaking, week-long work... sigh. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
