On 2015-10-14 13:04, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 October 2015, Colin Smale wrote: > >> Boundaries are often downloadable from authoritative sources. The >> downloadable data is however not always the legal definition of the >> boundary, but derived from that definition [...] > > A large fraction of 'authorative' sources of boundary data have very > little to do with the legal/contractual definition of the boundary. I > would probably go as far as saying the most inaccurate boundaries in > OSM come from authorative sources. I would be interested in some supporting evidence for this... >> The boundary is where the government says it is... > > Not in OSM - see the 'on the ground rule'. For OSM the boundary is what > locals treat as the boundary. That's a different boundary then. The area between the two might be "disputed", or there might be a difference between "de jure" and "de facto" boundaries - which are both right, just in different contexts. There is room in OSM for both perspectives.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
