[Tagging] Related: Antarctic territories

Fernando Trebien fernando.trebien at gmail.com
Thu Dec 26 16:59:03 UTC 2013

For the sake of simplicity, you're right. To represent these territories
using regions, we'd need tags that would essentially duplicate the meaning
of existing ones.

So I see 2 reasonably equivalent solutions at the moment that would affect
the roles of boundary relations: "dejure" and "defacto" roles for boundary
ways, or "claimed" and "disputed" roles (or any similar word) for an area
(possibly also relation). I can see pros and cons in both approaches, both
for manual mapping and for data consumption in apps (particularly in the

On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Fernando Trebien <
> fernando.trebien at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Or, disputed territories wouldn't even have an admin_level tag and
>> would be mapped as regions (which always seemed to me as a generic
>> "fallback" for things that do not fit a specific standard):
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dregion
> How do you tell what kind of boundary is being disputed then?  I can think
> of tribal national boundaries, state boundaries, city limits, and national
> boundaries in North America that have disputed locations and territory
> under contest.
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

"The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months." (Moore's law)
"The speed of software halves every 18 months." (Gates' law)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20131226/f93d54eb/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list