Should you contribute open data to OpenStreetMap? • Hacker News Board

Re: Should you contribute open data to OpenStreetMap?

#221

Post by VictorPath » Fri, Dec 31, 2021, 2:52 PM UTC

avar wrote: post #185

VictorPath wrote: post #36

OpenStreetMap has an "on the ground rule" where a street, a street name, a city, a city name etc. are determined by who currently has control on the ground. So the Malvinas are the Falkland Islands, Derry is Londonderry etc. The sole exception to this is the Crimea, which the OSM board ruled is exempt from this rule, as they favor the Ukrainian government over the Russian government.

Your summary seems inaccurate per https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/DW... I.e. they ruled that any mass changes based on administrative declarations weren't OK, but changing street names was fine if the on the ground signage had been changed.

Well, the secretary of the OpenStreetMap foundation also said they are making an exemption to their rules in the case of Crimea ( https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2019-Feb... ).

So either what I and the person in charge of it are saying is inaccurate, or what you are saying is inaccurate.

Re: Should you contribute open data to OpenStreetMap?

#222

Post by avar » Fri, Dec 31, 2021, 5:46 PM UTC

VictorPath wrote: post #221

avar wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your summary seems inaccurate per https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/DW... I.e. they ruled that any mass changes based on administrative declarations weren't OK, but changing street names was fine if the on the ground signage had been changed.

Well, the secretary of the OpenStreetMap foundation also said they are making an exemption to their rules in the case of Crimea ( https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2019-Feb... ). So either what I and the person in charge of it are saying is inaccurate, or what you are saying is inaccurate.

You started that they were making an exception to "[on the ground rules] where a street, a street name, a city, a city name etc. are determined by who currently has control on the ground".

This falls under criteria #3 on the linked page[1] and as far as I can tell is being done with the same "on the ground" rule that OSM has always used.

The exception you're linking to is relevant to what country relation and similar data structures Crimea is in. The usual application of the rule would be to have it Russia only, but it's in both Russia and Ukraine.

Almost nobody who uses OSM ever has to deal with country relations, so implying that this is some major policy change is blowing things out of proportion.

It also seems like the least bad way to mark up the data to me. To the extent that geopolitical borders mean anything it's in fact the case that Crimea is still to some extent Ukranian, even though Russia has "on the ground" control. I.e. various other countries have sanctions etc. in place that recognize that that's the case, as opposed to the rest of Russia.

If WWII happened today wouldn't the most useful thing for OSM to do to still have say the Channel islands in the UK to some extent in 1943, and under Axis control? I.e. to have overlapping claims of sovereignty, and simply add disputed/occupied relations on top of those?

1. https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/DW...

Re: Should you contribute open data to OpenStreetMap?

#223

Post by VictorPath » Sat, Jan 01, 2022, 7:34 AM UTC

avar wrote: post #222

VictorPath wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the secretary of the OpenStreetMap foundation also said they are making an exemption to their rules in the case of Crimea ( https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2019-Feb... ). So either what I and the person in charge of it are saying is inaccurate, or what you are saying is inaccurate.

You started that they were making an exception to "[on the ground rules] where a street, a street name, a city, a city name etc. are determined by who currently has control on the ground". This falls under criteria #3 on the linked page[1] and as far as I can tell is being done with the same "on the ground" rule that OSM has always used. The exception you're linking to is relevant to what country relation and similar…

I am not the one saying OpenStreetMap is making a special exception only for Crimea, the secretary of OpenStreetMap said it. I agree with the secretary that an exception is being made.

You are right that this exception is not all-encompassing of everything pertaining to Crimea.

Re: Should you contribute open data to OpenStreetMap?

#224

Post by avar » Sun, Jan 02, 2022, 12:29 AM UTC

VictorPath wrote: post #223

avar wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You started that they were making an exception to "[on the ground rules] where a street, a street name, a city, a city name etc. are determined by who currently has control on the ground". This falls under criteria #3 on the linked page[1] and as far as I can tell is being done with the same "on the ground" rule that OSM has always used. The exception you're linking to is relevant to what country relation and similar…

I am not the one saying OpenStreetMap is making a special exception only for Crimea, the secretary of OpenStreetMap said it. I agree with the secretary that an exception is being made. You are right that this exception is not all-encompassing of everything pertaining to Crimea.

I was replying to your claim that "a street name, a city, a city name etc. are determined by who currently has control on the ground [...] the sole exception to this is the Crimea".

The linked page specifically addresses this, and shows that you're wrong about that.

If the Russians update a street sign in Crimea it's OSM general policy that the data should be updated to reflect that.

You then moved the goal post to there being some specific exception to general policies relating to Crimea.

That's true, but nobody in this thread claimed that wasn't the case. I'm saying that you're misrepresenting those exceptions.