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 [email protected] instead. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [email protected] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
