Thanks, Andy. I'm currently working on refining my proposal. You're right that some of it is just to define what we already do. I've had a few private conversations with others to get feedback, as well as the feedback here and on the discussion page.
I expect to have Version 1.2 posted, with examples on the development server, this weekend. Take good care, John On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 1:15 PM Andy Townsend <[email protected]> wrote: > (previous conversations heavily edited) > > On 28/11/2018 10:49, Rory McCann wrote: > > > > > > On 28/11/2018 06:39, Johnparis wrote: > > > >> ... Finally, is there some reason you want to create a competing > >> proposal? I don't have any knowledge of two competing proposals being > >> discussed at the same time; would they be followed by two votes? I > >> thought the idea was to reach consensus. > > > > Yes this can appear a little snarky, that's not my intent. I half > > heartely suggested this idea 2 years ago ( > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-May/029211.html > > ), but abandoned it. > > > > As you know, recent events mean OSM should have an answer to this. > > We'll talk and discuss and surely we can come to consensus. > > > Personally at this stage I'd suggest keeping things simple, and > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/ClaimedBorders is > certainly simpler than > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Mapping_disputed_boundaries > . Some of the definition in Mapping_disputed_boundaries is useful, but > some might need clarifying (I'm thinking of the "De facto borders" and > "Default borders" definitions, which if I read correctly is just > defining some of what we currently do). I suspect that the idea of > "OSM-designated borders" might meet some opposition, even though we > effectively have those in a few places. The former Western Sahara is an > example; attempts to claim that Morocco has control over all of the > former Western Sahara have been reverted, but attempts to better map the > wall (which is visible from imagery) have been welcomed. > > As I understand it, the broad requirements of both proposals are similar > - in a case with two claims over an area you'd get either two extra > relations (in the case of Crimea) or only one (Serbia/Kosovo). The new > relations will be large (relations the size of a country, however you > define that, tend to be) and may be subject to breakage as current > admin_level=2 relations are (those are monitored by e.g. > https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=728103#p728103 ). > > It'd be good to get something into the OSM data that represents these > claims so that we can provide fully worked examples to people who want > to render particular sets of borders, the same as we do for people who > want to create maps in a particular language. > > Best Regards, > > Andy > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
