[OSM-talk] Search results for disputed territories (Nominatim)

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 11/24/2014 02:43 AM, maning sambale wrote:
> I believe the data is correct having properly tagged in an admin_level
> relation for both countries.

Including a closed way in several disjunct admin relations is not
usually considered "correct" in OSM. It might represent a correct
recording of different claims to the feature but it breaks a number of
assumptions that writers of tools tend to make.

It is good to start a discussion about how to properly map competing
claims for regions in OSM, but at the moment our data model usually
forces us to decide on one, that's why we have the "on the ground rule".

Technically, one would perhaps have to invent new relation roles for
that - the Scarborough Shoal would have to be a member of Sansha City
not in the role "outer" but something like "disputed_outer". Which of
course is not understood by any software at the moment!

> Also, this is an appeal to connect to both PH and CN mappers not
> continue reverting each others edits.  We are part of an international
> community and we should not be escalating this border issue any
> further into OSM.

DWG has been involved in a couple of edit wars in the region and anyone
tempted to edit names or boundaries in the South China Sea and
*especially* regarding the Paracel Islands, Sansha, or the "Nine-dotted
line", please don't, and contact data at osmfoundation.org instead.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"