[OSM-talk] Boundary relation with >5000 members?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Roland Olbricht wrote:
> For this reason I would strongly encourage you to use the territorial waters 
> like most countries in Europe.

As far as I understood Julio, he wanted to say that while they'd use the 
territorial waters for the country of Chile, their administrative 
subdivisions do *not* have something like territorial waters, so their 
authority ends at the coastline.

I'm starting to think that maybe we should stop rendering administrative 
boundaries altogether. I think that technically Julio did the right 
thing, but this example shows that rendering that kind of boundary is 
somewhat useless.

You might now be tempted to say: "Oh well, let's just skip rendering 
boundaries where the boundary is a also coastline". But firstly this is 
likely to be complicated with Mapnik, and secondly, much to my dismay, 
mappers in Germany have begun to map municipal boundaries along the 
coastline as a separate way, with a geometry *different* from the 
coastline, arguing that even if the boundary has been defined to match 
the coastline a certain time ago, the coastline may have changed and 
legally the boundary has not, creating little bits of maritime territory 
belonging to the municipality and little bits of land territory between 
the coast and the border of the seashore municipality.

Bye
Frederik