[Tagging] Disputed area
gdt at ir.bbn.com
Sun Jul 19 15:08:14 UTC 2015
Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> writes:
> sent from a phone
>> Am 19.07.2015 um 10:38 schrieb Eric SIBERT <courrier at eric.sibert.fr>:
>> Any suggestion?
> it would be nice to have a tag (or maybe relation role) to be
> optionally put on admin boundaries which stated according to whom this
> was the boundary. This way we could have different boundaries for the
> same territory, each version with a reference to the country
> advocating the version. Maybe the presence of this tag/role would also
> be defined as declaring a dispute (i.e. it would be wrong to put it on
> undisputed borders).
> AFAIK, today this is already done, but in freetext (key note or
> description) and not in a machine readable form.
I concur. I was wondering about something perhaps a bit more
complicated, which is to have multiple borders to denote the undisputed
and disputed areas.
Imagine country A on the left and B on the right.
At far left, A and B agree that you are in A.
Then there is a border between agreed-A and region that A and B claim.
And then another border between the dual-claim region and area that both
agree are in B.
So perhaps a relation that carries the border tag with two ways as
members. The relation would have the boundary tags, and also a disputed
tag of some sort listing the set of countries involved in the dispute.
Then each member way has a tag of which country (countries really, but
only those adjacent) thinks that way is the border. We could require
that the ways making up the relation make up a closed area,
This could get tricky for 3-way or more situations, but it seems
reasonably straightforward for the described case.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 180 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Tagging