On 18/09/2015, Colm Moore <[email protected]> wrote: > You will probably find that there is a statutory instrument that defines > much of the EEZ boundaries.
Yes, the corresponding document and points can be found at http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2014/si/86 and its title is tagged on the osm objects. I have no intention of touching these coordinates. But they only describe the boundary at sea. Nothing is said about the coastline/inland boundary, which is the one I'm addressing in my email. > I think islands should be included within the EEZ - its all the one > territorial claim - as islands change in size. That would fit with suggestion b) or c). > What is the OSM standard for this? http://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22border_type%22%3D%22eez%22+global&R is interesting. All kinds of layouts exist: * border-only (no area) boundaries (eg between Japan and Korea) * area encompassing the land (eg Philipines) * area following the offshore country border rather than the exact coastline (eg South Africa) * area crossing the land very roughly (eg Italy) * the Irish EEZ seems unique in OSM in following the coastline precisely Following these observations, and the fact that the irish statute document's points actually start at sea very near the territorial water boundary, I suggest a new option : make the EEZ follow its current offshore boundary, and the territorial boundary (which starts at http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144387894 and ends at http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/92987647). This follows the South Africa model, and actually results in a very lightweight and standard-conforming osm object. Thanks for pushing me to do these extra checks Colm, this new solution looks much more satisfying to me. Unless there's a contrary opinion I'm going to enact it this sunday (schedule permiting), but a couple of "+1" replies wouldn't hurt either. Cheers. _______________________________________________ Talk-ie mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
