On Tuesday 23 October 2018, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Agreed. I would be tempted to say, however, that if a country > requires a certain boundary depiction by law, like e.g. India and > China do, then that's the same level of verifiability like that > country's internal boundaries for which we also rely on what the > "official" take is. At least the current laws regarding the Indian > border are much more than "an opinion of a political faction".
A territorial claim that does not represent de facto administration is usually inherently non-verifiable because the claiming authority is by definition the only source of the information (this is why it is called a claim). Unless a territorial claim coicides with a de facto administrative division its geometry is usually not independently verifiable. India would certainly remove any boundary markers indicating the limits of a Chinese claim on territory they control. Boundaries of de facto administration OTOH can normally be independently verified even at the higher admin levels if they are demarcated or if they coicide with physically observable features. The fact that much of the administrative boundary data in OSM is imported and never has actually been verified on the ground is a different matter. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
