Anthony wrote: >On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Randy ><rwtnospam-new...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>To me, in the US, boundary=military makes sense from the perspective that >>a military base is usually under federal jurisdiction, rather than the >>state and local jurisdiction of the political/administrative boundaries >>around it. > >I don't like the "usually", and I don't like the fact that this >federal exclusive jurisdiction is something which can exist in >non-military areas (such as federal prisons or federal parks) as well. > I'd rather see "boundary=federal enclave" >(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_enclave) or something like that >to represent this. > >You'd still likely want something=military in addition, but the >jurisdictional issue should be solved once, not repeatedly for each >different situation.
I'm OK with that. I assume you mean the something=military is a property of the boundary way, as well. It overtly fits the description of "federal enclave" in wikipedia. What would you suggest as a name for the key, "something", or is there "something" out there already? If not, possibly this needs to be thrown to region.us. Wikipedia defines federal enclave in US terms. I thought about a more general approach with boundary=enclave, admin_level=2, but, there is a relation role=enclave, that doesn't really fit the federal enclave situation, since the federal enclave is actually within the federal boundary, but excludes lower levels of administration. The current enclave role might fit a US base hosted in a foreign country, though. -- Randy _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
