[freeciv-data] Re: freedata

[Niels Weber <nath@xxxxxxxx>]

Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:

> On Sat, 6 Jan 2001, Niels Weber wrote:
> 
>> So why not have a netherland.historic and a netherland.modern?
> 
> I would not mind. But what period to chose?

Perhaps no period but instead include all cities that where once part of 
the netherlands.

>>> Official Turkish policy is to call them mountain-Turks.
>> 
>> It is at least a fantasy-nation, perhaps also historic, I don't know.
> 
> It is definetely not a fantasy-nation: There are Real Life(tm) people
> who consider themselves Kurdish. But it is of course historic _and_
> modern. 
> I propose to follow the idea of R. Miller in this matter. 

Okay, what I meant was fantasy-state.
I think if it's possible to find some leader names and enough cities for 
a nation, we can include it. But we wouldn't include it in "nations 
recognized by UN".

>> I think, if we were in the 19th century and would be playing with modern 
>> nations, poland would have to be excluded.
> 
> And Germany too, if we would subscribe to the idea that a nation has to
> have a state.

Yes, instead we would have Prussia, Bavaria and so on, at least if we 
choose a period before 1871.

>>> I do not like it. I would rather like to include every nation that
>>> somebody wants to be included to be included. And I do think that it is
>>> possible to decide what is a nation and what is not. Take the existance of
>>> a language as an example.
>> 
>> I agree with this. We first have to lift the current limit of 63 nations 
>> somehow...
> 
> Find the definition and change it. But maybe one should divide the nation-
> choosing dialogue into four parts (like a notebook):
> 
> - UNO-nations: States that are recognized by the UN
> - other nations
> - historic nations
> - fantasy nations

As the limit is lifted now (thank you Thue), the division is the next step.

>> Therefore I propose that we have two rulesets: one modern, one historic.
> 
> Again: What period would you like? Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation?
> Second Reich? Weimar Republic? Third Reich? 
> 
> Other histories are probably not less difficult.
> 
> That's why I think it would be easiest to put all cities into one ruleset.

See above. It wasn't meant as an official rule that you're just allowed 
to include citiesfrom a definite period. It's just for those who want to 
create nation-rulesets. So if you want another german ruleset than I 
created (as I created the modern one), you could just create a 
german.historic ruleset.

>> I made the changes, because all that I knew about a ruleset-policy was, 
>> that we don't include cities that belong to other nations nowadays.The 
> 
> Where was that policy given?

I found it somewhere in the archives, don't know the exact location anymore.

>> second rule I know was about the order of the cities (by size and age), 
>> which I didn't follow, because I haven't got the perl-script that was 
>> made for ordering and because I was to lazy to search for every single 
>> city in my enceclopedia to find the founding date. (If someone sends me 
>> the perl-script, perhaps I'm not to lazy anymore...)
> 
> I don't speak Perl, sorry. But looking things up in the enceclopedia
> should be done. I don't have any ;o)

I started doing this for german.ruleset. Boy, that's work...

Niels