<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Hello,<br>
<br>
There seems to be no actual consensus on the way to map disputed
borders.<br>
The <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf">statement
from the Foundation</a> recommend to map the border that "best
meets realities on the ground" but it's not what is actually in
our database:<br>
See for instance :<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=12/45.8481/18.8378">https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=12/45.8481/18.8378</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://framapic.org/kIvnPSllBtnv/h1J8xti7US1F.gif">https://framapic.org/kIvnPSllBtnv/h1J8xti7US1F.gif</a><br>
Both borders (according to Croatia vs according to Serbia) are
mapped.<br>
<br>
The same between Soudan and South Soudan:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://framapic.org/lcWCkmek7L7i/icYVenvHzPZs.gif">https://framapic.org/lcWCkmek7L7i/icYVenvHzPZs.gif</a><br>
<br>
In some places, there are boundary=disputed or dispute=yes on the
boundary ways, which is very convenient for a map-maker to know
that there is a dispute on these border and that you may want to
render it with a different style (or use another source).<br>
Should this practice be generalized on all disputed borders or at
least submitted as a proposal ?<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Noémie Lehuby
Qwant Research</pre>
</body>
</html>