On 10 August 2010 19:49, Liz <[email protected]> wrote: > 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?
I didn't see the original post, but if they are truly indepenedent of a nation I'd be tagging it as admin_level=2 the same as any other country, but if however they are more like a state within a country maybe tagging similar to states would be more accurate, eg admin_level=4... _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
