[OSM-talk] Feature Proposal - RFC - Mapping disputed boundaries

[Victor Shcherb]

Hi All,
It might sound a bit critical but I believe the ways *without a role * in
admin_level=2 creates more confusion than bring value.
First of all, the biggest value of admin_level=2:
- to identify country as it is in UN
- to have name translated in different languages
- to have extra tags related to the country (probably spoken language or
some details like right/left hand driving)
- define further administrative structure *driven by local country
authorities.*

I like the idea that Ukraine has a proper admin subdivision for regions
defined by local OSM community and it has Crimea registered with role
"claimed" which is 1) indicative and 2) valuable

Ways on these relations could be misinterpreted  as 1) official boundaries
by UN 2) boundaries that are controlled and patrolled by official army 3)
boundaries "recognized" by OSMF 4) boundaries by constitution of the
country itself . And it creates a mess of interpretation and doesn't help
anybody.

Another argument that ways of admin_level=2, these enormous relations are
mostly broken and create issues for editing/validating anyway. In theory
the users of admin_level boundaries could use the sum of further
administrative division and subselect proper roles.

So, I would suggest:
1) To get rid of non-role member ways from admin_level relation
2) But keep the ways themselves visible that will represent controlled
boundaries

Best Regards,
Victor

On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 at 09:33, Roland Olbricht <roland.olbricht at gmx.de>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> a much simpler approach is to look into the respective constitution.
>
> The Ukrainian constitution defines the state's territory in article 133.
> Other countries, like Germany do so as well, and Ireland does or has
> done so. France does not define its terriotry in the constitution, and
> the UK has AFAIK no constituation. Probably in both countires laws exist.
>
> Thus I suggest to create a relation comprising the regions mentioned in
> that said article. It should hold the various name tags and a distinct
> tag (not "boundary", "admin_level", or "source") to indicate that it is
> a boundary according to the consitution, e.g.
> "legitimation=constitution" (and "legitimation=national_law" if not
> declared by the constitution). Countries where the constitution
> conincides with the de-facto border can just get the tag.
>
> For Cyprus and Western Sahara, I have been unable to find the relevant
> documents. I'm cautiously optimistic that they can be modeled in the
> same way.
>
> Given that there is at most one constiution per country, that those are
> designed to change infrequently and most countries are expected to
> conincide, this allows to add no-nonsense data without opening a can of
> worms.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Roland
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20181127/b3f95d72/attachment.html>