[Tagging] My proposal for disputed country borders

Rory McCann rory at technomancy.org
Tue Nov 27 21:42:01 UTC 2018

This is my suggestion for how to map disputed/claimed borders.
(but I appear to have broken the wiki).

This proposal is simple. Map the claimed border of a country according 
to another country as another regular {{Tag|type|boundary}} relation, 
but add {{Tag|boundary|claimed_administrative}} + 
{{Tag|claimed:admin_level||2}} (since we're nearly always dealing with 
countries) Add the regular tags for a boundary relation (e.g. 
{{Tag|ISO3166-1}}, {{Tag|name}}).

Then add {{Tag|according_to:XX||yes/no}} for each country that does or 
doesn't claims this is the border of the subject country. If 
{{Tag|according_to:XX}} is missing for an object, the value should be 
assumed to be "yes" if this is {{Tag|boundary|administrative}}, and "no" 
if it's {{Tag|boundary|claimed_administrative}}.

== Examples ==

=== Kosovo ===

{{Wikipedia|en|Kosovo|text=no}} has been 
  }} recognised by about half the members of the UN, since it is de 
facto  acting as a country, it's mapped in OSM {{relation|2088990}}, as 
{{Tag|boundary|administative}}+{{Tag|admin_level||2}}. Kosovo was part 
of Serbia, which is {{relation|1741311}}, and also 
{{Tag|boundary|administative}}+{{Tag|admin_level||2}}. Serbia & Spain 
don't recognise Kosovo, so I presume they view the border of "Serbia" to 
be the land covered by {{relation|2088990}}+{{relation|1741311}}. We can 
map this by copying the Serbia relation ({{relation|1741311}}), and 
changing the members to include the larger area, then add 

We can add {{Tag|according_to:XK||yes}} to the Kosovo relation, since 
(IIRC) the de facto border is what the government there claims as the 
border. We can add {{Tag|according_to:RS||no}} to the Serbia relation, 
which means "This is the de facto border of Serbia, and they claim it's 
not the border, and the UK claims it is, and Mexico claims it isn't".

=== Crimea ===

Left as an exercise for the reader.

=== Kashmir ===

(Correct me if I'm wrong) {{Wikipedia|en|Kashmir conflict}} is mostly a 
dispute between India and Pakistan, but China has claims on some parts. 
Neither India or Pakistan control all of what they claim. (i) The de 
facto border of India, (ii) The de facto border of Pakistan (current OSM 
countries), (iii) The borders of India according to India, (iv) The 
borders of Pakistan accroding to India, (v) The borders of Pakistan 
according to Pakistan, (vi) The borders of India according to Pakistan.

Each of these 6 options would be mapped with a separate relation.

== Advantages ==

* Copies the same logic from multipolygons, being supported by
* 100% backwards compatible with existing scheme to map countries
* Easily readable tags that data consumers can probably deduce.

== Disadvantages ==

* Creates more relations, several extra per disputed area. This could be 
unwieldy an could lead to data consistancies

== Using the data ==

=== Rendering a Map ===

To render a map of the world with the Serbian view of borders, you 
import the data with `osm2pgsql`, then run a SQL query like:

DELETE FROM planet_osm_polygon WHERE boundary = 'administrative' AND 
'admin_level'='2' AND tags->'claimed:by:RS' = 'no',
UPDATE planet_osm_polygon SET admin_level = '2', boundary = 
'administrative' WHERE boundary = 'claimed_administrative' AND 
'claimed_admin_level'='2' AND tags->'claimed:by:RS' = 'yes',

or an SQL VIEW could be used.

(Or adjust your map style appropriately to look at the 
{{Tag|according_to:XX}} tag, with a reasonable default).

=== Data analysis ===

With an osm2pgsql database, you can see what areas are claimed by 
country X, but not de facto controlled by it.

== See also ==

* [[Proposed features/Mapping disputed boundaries]]
* [[Proposed_features/DisputedTerritories|Previous (abandoned) 
proposal]] on mapping disputed territories.

More information about the Tagging mailing list