IMO the logic behind putting the EU as admin_level=1 would have meant that the United States of America, the USSR and Australia would have been made admin_level=1 when they were formed from their preceding entities (if OSM had existed at those times).
I would suggest that contrary to the preceding thread: if and when the EU becomes as unified as the above examples it would make more sense to put the EU as a whole as admin_level=2 and add one to all boundaries of the states and subareas already mapped within it. On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 10:40, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On 30.07.20 11:19, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: > > Unlike such objects EU has (AFAIK) well defined border, matching > > existing administrative boundaries, so problems inherent in > > mapping fuzzy objects are not present. > > I'm not an expert on international treaties but I believe that if France > bought Alaska from the US tomorrow, then Alaska would become part of the > EU, without the EU having much of a say in it, isn't that so? > > This is of course a very hypothetical example but little swaps of > un-inhabited land happen between neighbouring countries from time to > time. The "EU boundary" is the sum of whatever national boundaries its > member states have. Same with the "Schengen area" which is guarded by > Frontex which you linked to; it's a construct that is the result of a > contract but not an administrative area. > > > I am not opposing it and it seems defensible. > > Anything is, on this mailing list ;) > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
