On 23/10/18 03:24, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
22. Oct 2018 16:59 by colin.sm...@xs4all.nl
<mailto:colin.sm...@xs4all.nl>:
On 2018-10-22 16:34, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
I strongly disagree, we map reality.
There is no one true reality, only perceptions.
There is both a true reality and our biased interpretation of it. But
it many
cases it is possible to select criteria, rules, categorizations where
bias is small and
our interpretation align.
But anyway that is a philosophical claim and that discussion is
unlikely to lead anything useful.
Which reality takes precedence in your mind, may not be the same
for everyone. Reality is subjective.
What is the test to apply to decide whether a point is included in
country A or country B?
In case of Russian/Ukrainian border, as defined by on the ground line
of control
"is area controlled by Russian army or Ukrainian army" works quite
well, better than
"is this area claimed by Russia" or "is this area claimed by Ukraine"
In the case of disputed borders, there are at least two realities
(as perceived by the parties to the dispute) and possibly a third
reality as perceived by a number of locals
There is one reality and multiple interpretations of it. It is
preferable to map things so that
interpretations are not different between mappers.
Some interesting reading here on the 'reality' of a 'country'..
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-03/countries-changing-what-it-means-to-be-a-nation-state/10435028
In particular the Mohawk Nation at Akwesasne is of interest - spans 2
'countries' ... I think it is like the reindeer headers of Finland/Russia.
Think you'll find the perceptions change depending on the experience of
the individual and possibly their cultural links.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
