[OSM-talk] 12nm territorial borders - useful or rubbish?

Elizabeth Dodd edodd at billiau.net
Tue Feb 15 07:59:29 GMT 2011


On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 17:44:38 +0100
M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2011/2/14  <edodd at billiau.net>:
> >>>  I've been thinking about the 12nm territorial borders on sea that
> >>> we have in many places, notably in Europe. Many of them seem to
> >>> have been auto-generated by simply placing a buffer around the
> >>> coastline.
> >>>
> >>> My first question is, do they really have legal significance? They
> 
> 
> they do have legal significance (the original nautical
> borders/territorial waters, usually 12 nautic miles, sometimes more as
> stabilized in international treaties)
> 
> 
> > 1) are the sources of the lines marked?
> 
> 
> I agree that if you imported them from a reliable source and you are
> sure you did all the transformations correctly, you should mark the
> source in the changeset comment, so the information is stored in the
> db.
> 
> 
> > 2) are the positions of the lines rated as to certainty?
> > 3) how would a mapper reviewing them decide where to work next?
> 
> 
> IMHO he'd better not touch them unless he is sure. It's the same as
> with every border: hard to see on the ground, but useful to have in
> the db
> 
> 
> > 4) should they be rendered in mapnik?
> 
> 
> IMHO yes, but that's up to the style sheet maintainer
> 
> 
> > 5) should they be in a file formatted for garmin users?
> 
> 
> this can be decided by who creates the garmin map
> 
> 
> > 6) how do we communicate the accuracy to garmin users?
> 
> 
> like we do it with all other stuff. Of course you shouldn't rely on
> them when their exact position is mission critical.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Martin

I know you are the man with the answer to every question, but you have
missed one



More information about the talk mailing list