----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Doerr" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Naming dispute over Jerusalem - OSM failure
On 05/10/2011 16:36, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
The status of Jerusalem as part of Israel is not disputed. Its status as
a Palestinian city is
I'm not sure that's true. Israel was effectively created as a result of a
UN partition plan that would have created a Jewish state and an Arab
state, but would have left Jerusalem administered by the UN itself. Even
now, I believe most countries do not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of
Israel: most treat Tel Aviv as the capital, presumably to emphasize that
they don't accept that Jerusalem unambiguously belongs to Israel.
This raises another point. Should the node in question have the tag
"capital=yes" removed, so that the map data reflects what seems to be the
intentional community consensus [1] ?
If the node is not tagged as the capital, then it may be less of a problem
how the name actually gets displayed.
David
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positions_on_Jerusalem
FWIW, the DWG's stance seems reasonable to me, although the obvious
solution would be to have the two names separated by 'space hyphen space'
as seems to be the case with Brussels. It would seem reasonable to give
Hebrew precedence - which ironically would mean the Arabic name would be
on the left!
--
Steve
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
