[Tagging] My proposal for disputed country borders
ajt1047 at gmail.com
Tue Nov 27 23:52:01 UTC 2018
On 27/11/2018 23:01, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> This proposal has several problems:
> 1) Too many new relations, up to 180 per border or whatever the number
> of independent states has reached.
It's a concern (I've made similar points about languages in the past)
but in this case I don't think that there will be _that_ many new border
relations. To take Ukraine as an example, there will only I suspect be
one extra relation, with a very large number of "according_to:XX" tags
as almost everyone supports Ukraine's border claim, but it doesn't match
the current line of control. You might get up to a dozen in some areas
(perhaps around the South China Sea, also UK with or without Chagos
Archipelago, Falklands, Gibraltar etc.), but I suspect not many more
> 2) OSM is for “real, current” data
> - Claimed borders are not real.
> - Many old claims have never been officially surrendered
It's true that verifiability is an issue here (the problems with some
historic claims were mentioned in a previous thread) but in many cases
there really isn't an argument about _where_ the border is, only _what_
the status of the thing within it has, and (taking Ukraine as an example
again) I'd suggest that the statement "Ukraine claims that Crimea is
part of Ukraine" is very verifiable.
> 3) “Don’t map your local legislation”
> - legislation in country X has no jurisdiction in country Y
Where the wiki says "Don't map your local legislation" it's again just
making a point about verifiability. "legislation in country X has no
jurisdiction in country Y" doesn't seem to exist in the OSM wiki at all;
so I guess that you're just saying that _only_ de facto boundaries
should be in OSM? That's nearly where we are now, except that we do
have a border for e.g. Western Sahara, and attempts have been made to
map the claims between India, China and Pakistan (but not currently the
resulting claimed country borders).
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 6:43 AM Rory McCann <rory at technomancy.org
> <mailto:rory at technomancy.org>> wrote:
> This is my suggestion for how to map disputed/claimed borders.
> (but I appear to have broken the wiki).
> (text snipped)
> == Examples ==
Just a thought - how about uploading some examples as a test to the dev
server (or elsewhere) to allow people to experiment with the data? It's
often easier to see potential problems once you're actually trying to
process the data rather than in the abstract.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging