DWG seeking information in Crimea

OSMF Data Working Group · 2018-10-24 07:03:38

The Data Working Group is reviewing our previous resolution on Crimea, to make certain it still reflects the situation on the ground, and we are looking for input from the communities involved before we make an updated resolution.

The previous resolution had four parts:
1. Edits to the administrative boundary for the region
2. Edits adding tags indicating that objects are in one country or another, such as addr:country on objects which would not normally have any addr tags
3. Edits changing place names between languages
4. Other matters.

We believe parts 2 and 4 both apply, as they are best practices which are important when editors are working together in a disputed region.

For part 3 and place names, the "on the ground" rule remains the method of determining the appropriate value for the name tag. Has the situation on the ground for what names are in use by locals or with signage changed?

Part 1 on the administrative boundary for the region is what we have identified as needing review. Based on information available, it appears
1. Ukraine claims the region as theirs
2. Russia claims the region as theirs
3. Russia has on the ground control of the region

Is this accurate?

We are not seeking information on who's control would be legitimate, or other opinions. OSM operates with the on the ground rule, and the administrative boundaries in OSM do not indicate if control is legitimate or illegitimate.

dudka · 2018-10-24 08:38:38

Nothing has changed since 2014.
Crimea is still occupied by Russia.

It seems that the current tagging of administrative boundaries fits OSM rules as much as possible.
Administrative boundaries are tagged by boundary=administrative relations.
Disputed area and control are tagged by following multipolygon
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3788824

andygol · 2018-10-24 09:32:36

There is nothing to discuss. We have more or less stable situation when Crimea is tagged as disputed territory.
Next discussion should be stopped as it may provoke an escalation of the war of edits.

I'm curious to see DWG minutes about raising this issue again. Posting this without such a decision looks quite controversial.

Kostik · 2018-10-24 19:47:36

Nobody expected anything else from you. Is this also true on the ground?

andygol · 2018-10-24 20:08:33

Moderatorial: Kostik, please refrain from trolling other participants.
This is a note of warning.

Upliner · 2018-10-24 20:16:10

Kostik wrote:

Nobody expected anything else from you. Is this also true on the ground?

Just like this and this and this and many other countries...

Kilkenni · 2018-10-24 23:46:12

Agreed here. I don't think the previous decision needs revising. While I can see why it can be questioned, I believe it was and still is the "lesser evil" compromise.

PS. The topic is highly explosive, especially if you consider that people disputing the status of Crimea in Russia risk facing criminal persecution. Including on forums like this one. Caution is advised.

andygol · 2018-10-26 19:23:18

Коментарі образливого характеру не припустимі.
KKS - попередження

OpenStreetMap Forum

#1 2018-10-24 07:03:38

DWG seeking information in Crimea

#2 2018-10-24 08:38:38

Re: DWG seeking information in Crimea

#3 2018-10-24 09:32:36

Re: DWG seeking information in Crimea

#4 2018-10-24 19:47:36

Re: DWG seeking information in Crimea

#5 2018-10-24 20:08:33

Re: DWG seeking information in Crimea

#6 2018-10-24 20:16:10

Re: DWG seeking information in Crimea

#7 2018-10-24 23:46:12

Re: DWG seeking information in Crimea

#8 2018-10-26 19:23:18

Re: DWG seeking information in Crimea

Board footer