[OSM-talk] Fwd: Fix maritime borders of Ceuta and Melilla (Spain)

Bert -Araali- Van Opstal bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com
Mon May 3 23:34:37 UTC 2021


Hello Andy,

It's OK to make it public, the resource you refer to is marineregions.com ?

I am in the final process of getting a waiver to use their data sets.

Following data sets are offered as to be included in OSM:

1. Maritime Boundaries v11;

2.     IHO Sea Areas;

3.     Marineregions: the intersect of the Exclusive Economic Zones and 
IHO areas;

4.     Marine and land zones: the union of world country boundaries and 
EEZ's;

5.     World Marine Heritage Sites;

6.     Emission Control Areas (Not integrated in gazetteer).

We have several options to make these available:
1. As shape files, downloadable from their website or from a OSM related 
server instance (OSMF Nextcloud ?)
2. As an imagery layer by accessing their gazetteer: 
https://marineregions.org/sources.php 
<https://marineregions.org/sources.php>

I don't see a feasible short term solution for mass importation of their 
data.  Not until we have global acceptance of their authority and 
feedback on compliance with local legislation and OSM practice, 
addressing the issues as mentioned before in this thread, like f.i. in 
the UK.  It seems feasible however, to organise this with local chapters.
So as a start I would suggest to start with manual tracing or import on 
individual country basis.

Please comment on the above or other options we have since I am not very 
experienced in these matters.

marineregions requested for some detailed attribution then just a 
general reference on the contributors page.  They would like to have 
attribution explicitly referencing the date of the data and the specific 
datasets.  A possible solution is that we would require the tags 
source=* and source:date=*  f.i. to be used mandatory.  Personally I 
don't see any objections to this, except the fact if we are willing and 
able to enforce or make this mandatory.  As an alternative I could offer 
them the option that we describe it as mandatory but don't have the 
infrastructure or resources to enforce it.

Your comments will be highly appreciated, as I see this as a big 
improvement for OSM to include data for boundaries from a recognised 
"authoritative" institution whos data is also used by the UN and 
expressed their interest to actively support OSM in integrating their 
data and co-operate with our community.

Greetings,


Bert Araali


On 01/05/2021 14:24, Andy Townsend wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hello,
>
> Just so that everyone is aware - Ceuta and Melilla haven't been
> forgotten about.  I'm aware (because I was cc:ed on the conversation) of
> at least one attempt to try and find a source from which a sensible
> border can be derived (without having to do it "freehand"), although as
> I said previously at
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2021-March/086288.html  <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2021-March/086288.html>  
> I'm not convinced that using that source will necessarily be easy. See also
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-es/2021-May/017737.html  .
>
> Best Regards,
> Andy (from the DWG)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210504/0faf5927/attachment.htm>


More information about the talk mailing list