OpenStreetMap Community Discussion on How to Handle the U.S. Federal Government’s Imminent Designation of the Gulf of Mexico as the ‘Gulf of America’

Fascinating thread — and an almost entirely civil discussion of what has become, for obvious reasons, an inflammatory topic. These are mapping and metadata nerds approaching the dilemma in the very nerdiest of ways. I found it rather soothing, and also quite informative — particularly the posts from Minh Nguyễn, who seems to be an OpenStreetMap super user. First:

So it turns out the UNGEGN is not actually a decision-making authority on individual toponyms. Their role is to encourage and facilitate standardization. They literally issue guidelines about guidelines. The closest thing to an authority on the gulf’s name in international law would be the International Hydrographic Organization. The IHO’s Limits of Oceans and Seas has been frozen in time without any updates since 1953, apparently because Japan and South Korea can’t agree on a name for the sea separating them. Maybe a certain dealmaker can get them to the bargaining table…

My kneejerk reaction to Trump’s “Gulf of America” executive order was that mapmakers should just roll their eyes, make the jerk-off motion, and ignore it. But that’s not practical. Mapmakers seek to appeal to authority on names. What’s the alternative? That Google and Apple (and OpenStreetMaps) serve as their own authorities on the names of topographical features and geographical points of interest? That’s not right. So you might think, well, the Gulf of Mexico is an international body of water, so the mapmakers should appeal to an international authority. The UN! But as Nguyễn cites, that’s not what the UN’s Group of Experts on Geographical Names does.

Another post in the thread from Nguyễn:

Ironically, Spanish-language media keeps having to explain why Gulf of America is problematic in English. In Spanish, América refers to the Americas as a whole, not the U.S. specifically. If one didn’t know any better, one would think it’s a gift to Cuba! Of course, this doesn’t justify the attempt to rename the gulf, since the intention is abundantly clear, but it does leave the name vulnerable to others reclaiming it for themselves. A more erudite politician might’ve chosen Gulf of Florida, which at least has a historical basis, dating to around the same time as Gulf of Mexico. But here we are.

And from yet another post by Nguyễn, a link to this new report on the order’s implications for the entire federal government from the Congressional Research Service (a nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress). Now we’ve gotten more good nerds involved: librarians. And whatever the answer is, it’s complicated.

I don’t like this ostensible renaming (rebranding?) of the Gulf of Mexico any more than you do. It’s petty and pointless, except for the trolling spite, which, of course, is the point. I don’t know what Apple is going to do, but I suspect, ultimately, if the Department of the Interior really does make this official, Apple Maps will follow suit, but perhaps with something like “Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America)” for users in the US.

Google should have simply done what Apple is doing, though, and remained utterly silent on the issue until and if it’s actually made official. Best thing we can hope for is that the Department of the Interior stalls on making the change in the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) and that Trump forgets about it by then.

★ Wednesday, 29 January 2025