[Talk-us] US-Mexico border precision

Andrew S. J. Sawyer assawyer at gmail.com
Sat Dec 18 00:18:38 GMT 2010

The Neddles dispute is not too much different from the dispute NH and
Maine had over their boundary stretching from the Piscataqua River to
the Isles of Shoals. Mainly it was over whether Seavy Island
(Portsmouth Naval Shipyard) belonged to NH or ME. The Supreme Court of
the US ruled in two cases involving the boundary giving Seavey Island
to Maine and fixing most of the  boundary.

I bring this up because various datasets may have different depictions
of a boundary. I recall (haven't searched) that issues involving
disputed maritime boundaries. What are your thoughts on tagging
disputed boundaries according to the typical manner but adding
"disputed=yes" and "disputed:note=[description of who claims and brief
description of why]."

Renderers will have to make their own decision as to which boundary
they will render or if they render both, etc.

Tying back to the US-Mexico boundary it would make sense to obtain the
highest-resolution boundary from each side and tag according to above.
I don't like boundary clutter but we should be able/try to
differentiate between poor resolution and disputed boundaries. I
acknowledge this is sometimes easier said than done.

Andrew S. J. Sawyer
Lee, New Hampshire

On 12/17/2010, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
> On 12/17/2010 12:47 AM, Alan Mintz wrote:
>> At 2010-12-16 19:39, Paul Johnson wrote:
>>> You'd think, but then you have Needles, Arizona, which California keeps
>>> trying to claim.
>> OK, I'll take the bait. Huh?
> Needles has been in a three-way dispute with Nevada, Arizona and
> California over which state they actually belong to for most of my
> lifetime.  It largely has to do with the want for Needles to not be in
> California and the language used in various agreements about where the
> state line is relative to the present course of the Colorado River.

More information about the Talk-us mailing list