On Tue, 10 Aug 2010, Paul Johnson wrote:
> We need to come up with a better way to map and tag autonomous regions,
> particularly in North America.  The talk page for the boundary= suggests
> that an administrative boundary is not the right tag; and I couldn't
> disagree more.
> 
> As a Cherokee, I find boundary=indian_reserve and boundary=native_nation
> to be intrinsically racist. While admin_level=1 is probably not right, I
> believe First Nations lines are administrative boundaries, the
> admin_level=* of which must reflect the degree of sovereignty agreed upon
> by treaty between the nation in question and the United States (or other
> potentially subjugating force). For example, the Cherokee Nation would be
> admin_level=2, whereas The Confederated Tribes of Grande Rhonde would be
> somewhere closer to the 3-5 range, and even smaller nations that got more
> heavily screwed over by the United States might fall in the 6-8 range.
> Yes, I realize this means Canada and the US and their member provinces,
> states, ridings and counties, would get turned into swiss cheese by most
> renderers, but are we looking for a map that looks like every other map,
> or a map that is accurate and objectively reflects the ground and legal
> truth?
> 

Paul, I can't comment on this at all, as I have no idea of how this works.
However, I think that you need to put more detail into the proposal and put it 
up on the wiki for any other First Nation persons to comment on.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to