Changeset: 115187152
Added relations marking disputed borders in Golan Heights area. Approximate lines have been drawn from public domain reference map. Feel free to improve upon them. #disputed_by_claimed_by
Closed by Jeff Underwood
Tags
created_by | JOSM/1.5 (18303 en) |
---|---|
hashtags | #disputed_by_claimed_by |
source | Natural Earth; https://www.loc.gov/item/92682948/ |
Discussion
-
Comment from mueschel
Hi,
this way can be removed? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1013928481 -
Comment from Jeff Underwood
Oh totally, just cleaned it up. Sorry about that.
I had some NE ways in JOSM to help with the digitization and missed cleaning up one of them.
-
Comment from zstadler
In https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120591354
user BodhidharmaI placed several questions in the fixme tag for the relation "1949 Israeli–Syrian DMZ"
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13574166 :1. What does "disputed_by" represent here (at the boundary of a DMZ)?
2. Does it mean DMZ itself is not recognized by these countries?
3. In which case, why IL?
4. Or does it mean the boundary is disputed (i.e. the disputing countries believe it should be elsewhere)?I believe these question belong here and not in the fixme tag.
-
Comment from zstadler
May I add that https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13574166 is a strange disputed boundary. I believe a boundary cannot be "disputed" when it is not "claimed_by" any country.
Specifically, Syria is not claiming this boundary. The Syrian claims were apparently mapped by https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13574167
-
Comment from BodhidharmaI
@Jeff Underwood. Additionally, you mentioned a “public domain reference map” in your original edit when you added this boundary. Can you explicitly provide a reference to this source?
-
Comment from zstadler
@BodhidharmaI see the source tag for this changeset -
https://www.loc.gov/item/92682948/ -
Comment from Jeff Underwood
Hello zstadler and BodhidharmaI
Thanks for reaching out. I believe I’ve covered most of what you asked below. Let me know if you still have more questions. Disputed borders are complicated to map and tricky to visualize using typical OSM tooling unfortunately.
To preface, this is the tagging schema in general. For rendering purposes, consider a claimed_by or recognized_by tag to mean this is a solid border for those viewpoints, while a disputed_by tag means this border should not render at all for those viewpoints. Lastly, for the remaining viewpoints that are not specifically tagged one way or the other, a dashed line showing that this border is in dispute will be shown. For the DMZ, none of the main parties currently claim it as their border, but it is one possible border with some historical precedent. So for rendering here, the intent is for uninvolved viewpoints to see it as a dashed line showing it as one of several possible borders. Since none of the main disputants claim this particular line, it is only marked with disputed_by tags in order to hide it for them as generally claimants should only see the one “correct” border for their viewpoint.
Here are direct answers to your questions as well BodhidharmaI
1. It means this is not considered a correct or possible border by the marked countries. The tag itself means do not render for those iso codes
2. Yes, this is not considered a valid border by the marked countries
3. Israel does not recognize this as a legitimate border
4. Yes, the countries marked believe the borders lie elsewhere and their viewpoints should be covered by other claims in the area. -
Comment from zstadler
Thanks Jeff for the elaborated answer.
It seems that the justification for mapping the DMZ line is for historic and/or future purposes, as you wrote:
> For the DMZ, none of the main parties currently claim it as their border, but it is one possible border with some historical precedent.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dhistoric says:
> Note that though solely historic objects should not be mapped as it is outside of scope of OSM (unlike projects like Open Historical Map), it makes sense to keep for some time old boundaries after administrative division change as form of note to make clear that there was a recent change of borders in a given location.Since this line does not have, AFAIK, any on-the -ground presence for more than 50 years, I suggest this relation to be removed from OSM. You may choose to copy it to Open Historical Map.
You also wrote:
> So for rendering here, the intent is for uninvolved viewpoints to see it as a dashed line showing it as one of several possible borders.I believe that OSM is not the appropriate platform for rendering potential political solutions for this decades-old conflict.
-
Comment from Jeff Underwood
Hi zstadler,
Forgive me if I’m mistaken as I’m not an expert on the conflict, but the DMZ line seems to correspond to the 1923 border which appears to be the last mutually agreed border while everything since has been enforced or de facto borders. So while this may not be an active claim by the disputants, in my opinion there is still validity to keeping it until a newer agreement supersedes it. Most other mapping platforms out there still render this DMZ line which at least adds some credibility to the claim that it is still relevant.
I totally appreciate that OSM is not the place to legislate conflicts and that is not the purpose of any of this mapping. This is a politically neutral project to map disputes as completely as possible in order to allow OSM administrative borders to be more flexible for downstream users where “on the ground” borders may not be desirable or even legal to display within a locality.
-Jeff
-
Comment from zstadler
Hi Jeff,
It seems like we agree that OSM is not about capturing potential future political agreements.
Could you summarize why, in your opinion, this relation should be part of OSM despite the fact that it does not fall under the definition of a disputed border, since no nation is calming it.
- zstadler
-
Comment from Jeff Underwood
Hi zstadler,
In the interest of avoiding conflict I'll just pull out that relation for now.
-Jeff
-
Comment from zstadler
Thank you, Jeff!
Ways (14)
- 1013928471, v1
- 1013928472, v1
- 1013928473, v1
- 1013928474, v1
- נהר הירדן (1013928475), v1
- נהר הירדן (1013928476), v1
- 1013928477, v1
- 1013928478, v1
- 1013928479, v1
- 1013928480, v1
- 1013928481, v1
- נהר הירדן (152416475), v20
- 727770995, v5
- 733999335, v3
Relations (9)
- Extent of Israeli Claim at Golan Heights (13574165), v1
- 1949 Israeli-Syrian DMZ (13574166), v1
- Extent of Syrian Claims at Golan Heights (13574167), v1
- מועצה אזורית גליל עליון (1378948), v60
- מועצה אזורית גולן (1379176), v53
- מועצה אזורית עמק הירדן (1380231), v49
- נהר הירדן/نهر الأردن (2246907), v59
- נפת רמת הגולן (11585174), v6
- נפת צפת (11586908), v13
Nodes (12)
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |