Knut Arne Bjørndal wrote: > "Raphael Studer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I've founde three relation proposals with nearly the seam aims. >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Boundaries >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Country >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Is_In >> >> I've also seen relations with type=nation meaning nearly the same as country. Seeing some use of undocumented nation relation I beg to differ. nation is not a country.
Countries are administratively (or by force) defined geographical entities. Countries generally don't overlap, have precise (although sometimes disputed) borders, can have exclaves, enclaves...can be mapped precisely http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country Nation are people with common culture. Nations can overlap, can have minorities in other countries, borders between nations are generally blurring with globalisation...can be mapped only vaguely. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation Sure, some countries might represent a nation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation-state but this certainly cannot be applied globally. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State#Usage So, I'm voting for country relation by using it in our parts of the wood. :) Stefan _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
