[Tagging] Disputed area

[Eric Sibert]

Yes, some disputed areas are more stable and, in osm, one may focuses  
first on it.

In a lot of cases, there is "de facto" one country administrating the  
area. We should use the "de facto" aspect to draw a closed  
boundary=administrative.

Then we may add to the relation disputed areas with different roles  
whenever they are inside or outside the "de facto" boundaries.

The disputed area may be itself defined by a relation including the  
area, the boundaries claimed by each government and may be some tags  
to indicate if the disputed area is recognized as such by each  
government and/or attributed to one specific government by some  
international organization (for "de jure" aspect?).

For my initial case (Mont-Blanc between fr and it), there is no "de  
facto" occupying country. I would split the boundary into two branches  
corresponding to each government claim. Define a disputed_area  
relation with:
- each branch
- the area
- claimed by France
- claimed by Italy
- dispute acknowledged by France
- dispute acknowledged by Italy
- dispute acknowledged by European Union
Put each branch in the corresponding country relations. Add to each  
country relation a disputed_area_inside with the disputed relation.
The main drawback is that there is an overlap between France and Italy  
that may stress some tools.

Gibraltar : there is a "de facto" occupying country. I would not split  
the boundary into two branches. Define a disputed_area relation with:
- the UK branch surrounding Gibraltar
- the earth border between UK and Spain
- the area
- claimed by Spain
- dispute acknowledged by Spain
- dispute acknowledged by Uk
Maintain the earth border in the corresponding country relations.
Add to UK relation a disputed_area_inside with the disputed relation.
Add to Spain relation a disputed_area_outside with the disputed relation.

Area claimed by nobody between Egypt and Sudan?
Split the boundary into two branches according to each government.
Define a disputed_area relation with:
- the Sudan branch
- the Egypt branch
- the area
(no claim, no dispute acknowledgement).

Is such a schema suitable for the Indian/China case? Does is allow to  
draw a map like the one presented?

Eric