OpenStreetMap Forum

The Free Wiki World Map

You are not logged in.

#376 2016-07-29 09:52:43

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Moin,

hier die aktuelle Missing Boundaries-Auswertung: https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.ph … 2016-07-29

Der Datenstand ist von 2016-07-28 23:27:02+02

18 Missings und zwei kritische Multipolygone.
   
Gruss
walter

Musste gerade feststellen, dass der zugesagte Revert Israel/Palestina nicht durchgeführt wurde sad
Edit: Kommt heute aber noch. da war noch einiges mehr defekt.

Last edited by wambacher (2016-07-29 10:34:50)

Offline

#377 2016-07-30 11:21:24

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Moin,

hier die aktuelle Missing Boundaries-Auswertung: https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.ph … 2016-07-30

Der Datenstand ist von 2016-07-29 23:10:02+02

55 Missings und 7 kritische Multipolygone.
   
Gruss
walter

Offline

#378 2016-07-31 11:08:36

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Moin,

hier die aktuelle Missing Boundaries-Auswertung: https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.ph … 2016-07-31

Der Datenstand ist von 2016-07-31 01:05:02+02

15 Missings und 6 kritische Multipolygone.
   
Gruss
walter

Offline

#379 2016-08-01 11:01:31

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Moin,

hier die aktuelle Missing Boundaries-Auswertung: https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.ph … 2016-08-01

Der Datenstand ist von 2016-07-31 22:18:02+02

27 Missings und 10 kritische Multipolygone.

China hat es erwischt.
tn_china2.png
   
Gruss
walter

Offline

#380 2016-08-02 10:58:57

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Moin,

hier die aktuelle Missing Boundaries-Auswertung: https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.ph … 2016-08-02

Der Datenstand ist von 2016-08-01 22:25:02+02

9 Missings und 4 kritische Multipolygone.
   
Gruss
walter

Offline

#381 2016-08-03 10:47:11

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Moin,

hier die aktuelle Missing Boundaries-Auswertung: https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.ph … 2016-08-03

Der Datenstand ist von 2016-08-02 22:09:02+02

8 Missings und 11 kritische Multipolygone.
   
Gruss
walter

Offline

#382 2016-08-03 23:38:23

SomeoneElse
Member
Registered: 2010-10-13
Posts: 1,134

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Just for info, the DWG has been asked to look at the territories within the current boundaries of Morocco in OSM, so I've sent a message to a number of recent editors via changeset discussion comment.  We'd be grateful to have the views of people here too.  The message I sent was:


Hello,
I'm writing to you on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.  Questions have been raised about the accuracy of the boundaries of Morocco, and I'm sending this message to many of the mappers who have edited in the area or expressed an interest, including you.

We're aware that there is disputed territory in the region.  Most notably the area covered by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Sahara , and also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceuta and other areas to the north.

First, it's worth mentioning https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images … mation.pdf .  That explains that what matters most to OSM in terms of names, borders and boundaries is the "on the ground" rule.  For example, if a majority of the population of an area speaks language "a" then it makes sense for OSM's "name" tag to be in language "a" (though of course other name tags such as name:b, name:c etc. can also be used to make maps in other languages).  Similarly, if the people of an area consider themselves to be part of country "a" and country "a" does indeed have control over the area, it makes sense for the area to be part of country "a" (and only country "a") in OSM.

Potential problems in the area covered by the Morocco admin_level 2 relation http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3630439 include:

1) That relation includes not only the part of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Sahara currently administered by Morocco (the part west of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Wa … _Sahara%29 ), it also includes the part of that territory east of it too.  Is this correct?  It seems at odds with OSM's "on the ground" rule, and with the UN peacekeepers' position described at http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missi … ound.shtml .

2) That relation also includes territories administered by Spain such as Ceuta and Melilla.  What evidence is there that Morocco controls these territories and that Spain does not?

Another major question, (largely dependant on the answer to (1) above) is:

3) If the area east of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Wa … _Sahara%29 isn't part of Morocco, what status should it have?  http://osm.mapki.com/history/relation.php?id=195838 did represent this territory and had several different admin levels before it was deleted.

The DWG would be grateful for your opinions on these matters.  You can either reply here or, if you prefer you can email data@osmfoundation.org directly and we'll read through all the replies.

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend (SomeoneElse) on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

Offline

#383 2016-08-04 10:33:54

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

SomeoneElse wrote:

Just for info, the DWG has been asked to look at the territories within the current boundaries of Morocco in OSM, so I've sent a message to a number of recent editors via changeset discussion comment.  We'd be grateful to have the views of people here too.

Hi Andy,

great news. Let's hope the best.

Regards
walter

Offline

#384 2016-08-04 10:42:12

SimonPoole
Member
Registered: 2010-03-14
Posts: 1,786

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

SomeoneElse wrote:

Just for info, the DWG has been asked to look at the territories within the current boundaries of Morocco in OSM, so I've sent a message to a number of recent editors via changeset discussion comment.  We'd be grateful to have the views of people here too. ....

Andy, just as a further point the LWG has received a complaint by an inhabitant of Ceuta complaing that the maritime border demarking Spanish control of the waters on Ceutas and Mellilas coast had been removed.

Offline

#385 2016-08-04 11:00:08

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Moin,

hier die aktuelle Missing Boundaries-Auswertung: https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.ph … 2016-08-04

Der Datenstand ist von 2016-08-03 21:10:02+02

13 Missings und zwei kritische Multipolygone.

Venezuela hat es erwischt.
tn_venezuela.png
   
Gruss
walter

Offline

#386 2016-08-04 11:23:20

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Als Hintergrundinformation für die nicht soooo beteiligten Mapper in DE:

Es gibt einen Disput über die marokkanische Grenze im Süden, im Osten und an der Mittelmeerküste.

Im Süden befindet sich die noch nicht vollständig von der Völkergemeine anerkannte Republik West Sahara, deren Existenzberechtigung von Marokko nicht akzeptiert wird. De facto übt Marokko dort keinerlei Funktionen mehr aus und es gibt sogar einen hunderte von Kilometern langer Grenzwall. Hier greift also aus OSM-Sicht die "Rule on Ground".

Östlich der West Sahara gibt es ebenfalls ein Gebiet, dass mMn zur Republik Sarahwi gehört, die ebenfalls "verschwunden" ist.

siehe https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demokrati … map-en.svg

Und an der Mittelmeerküste gibt es einige spanische Exclaven, deren maritimen Grenzen ebenfalls strittig sind.

Nun gibt es in Marokko eine ziemlich aggressive Gruppe, die im April/16 West Sahara gelöscht und die lokalen Grenzen angepasst hat. Korrekturen diverser Mapper wurden blitzartig reverted, wobei mMn auch vom Einsatz von Zweit- und Drittaccounts nicht zurückgeschreckt wurde. Dies machte die ganze Sache so undurchsichtig, dass mehrere Kollegen (darunter auch ich) "kapituliert" haben und danach lange nicht passiert ist.

Ich hoffe, dass die jetzige Aktion der DWG Erfolg und Bestand haben wird.

Gruss
walter

Nachtrag: Entsprechender Changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41120332

Last edited by wambacher (2016-08-04 11:34:24)

Offline

#387 2016-08-04 13:40:30

SimonPoole
Member
Registered: 2010-03-14
Posts: 1,786

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

wambacher wrote:

...

Und an der Mittelmeerküste gibt es einige spanische Exclaven, deren maritimen Grenzen ebenfalls strittig sind.

Die Enklaven selbst sind natürlich auch "strittig" (wie auch mehrere kleine Inseln), aber da haben sie sich nicht getraut to Grenzen zu entfernen.

Offline

#388 2016-08-04 14:48:12

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

SimonPoole wrote:

Die Enklaven selbst sind natürlich auch "strittig" (wie auch mehrere kleine Inseln), aber da haben sie sich nicht getraut to Grenzen zu entfernen.

Das hätte aber mächtig Ärger gegeben. Zudem existiert da ein hoher Grenzzaun https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melilla#M … ach_Europa an der stark befestigten Grenze, die die Spanier wohl heftig verteidigen würden (im Real Live und bei OSM). Liegt da nicht auch die EU-Aussengrenze?

Gruss
walter

Last edited by wambacher (2016-08-04 14:48:43)

Offline

#389 2016-08-04 19:33:31

SimonPoole
Member
Registered: 2010-03-14
Posts: 1,786

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

wambacher wrote:

..Liegt da nicht auch die EU-Aussengrenze?

Klar, aber ich bin ziemlich sicher, dass die Anhänger der Gross-Marokko Idee im wesentlichen alle aktuellen Grenzen von Marokko bestreiten ....

Offline

#390 2016-08-04 22:27:27

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Der von SomeoneElese angeschriebene Mapper - wohl aus der Gegend - mappt übrigens fleissig weiter ("harmlose" Sachen), scheint es aber nicht nötig zu erachten, in die Diskussion einzusteigen. Passt zu dem, was ich von ihm schon öfters beobachtet habe.

Mal sehen, wie es weitergeht

Gruss
walter

@SomeoneElse: The mapper is still active (minor uncritical edits) but did not enter the discussion yet.
May be, he contacted DWG per mail? Can't believe that.

and what will happen (tomorrow?) when he still did not answer?

Regards
walter

Last edited by wambacher (2016-08-04 22:33:09)

Offline

#391 2016-08-04 23:17:18

SomeoneElse
Member
Registered: 2010-10-13
Posts: 1,134

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

@wambacher As can be seen from http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-disc … 36.0/-10.4 I did send out a large number of "please let the DWG know what you think" messages.  A couple of the mappers concerned have been in contact with the DWG directly by mail or OSM message, but not many yet.  Obviously we'll give everyone a few more days to make sure that everyone has a chance to put their views across. 

I don't expect that we will be redrawing the boundaries of anywhere tomorrow, and given holidays and other commitments it may well be a couple of weeks away.

Offline

#392 2016-08-04 23:32:31

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

SomeoneElse wrote:

I don't expect that we will be redrawing the boundaries of anywhere tomorrow, and given holidays and other commitments it may well be a couple of weeks away.

Great. The boundaries have been deleted about 4 month ago and you are right: there is no need to rush.

regards
walter

Offline

#393 2016-08-05 13:02:00

SomeoneElse
Member
Registered: 2010-10-13
Posts: 1,134

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Actually, one part of the "Western Sahara" question that I haven't had a lot of feedback on yet was the third part:

SomeoneElse wrote:

3) If the area east of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Wa … _Sahara%29 isn't part of Morocco, what status should it have?  http://osm.mapki.com/history/relation.php?id=195838 did represent this territory and had several different admin levels before it was deleted.

As I understand it (based on reading about the situation, not on any local knowledge) the Polisario / SADR control east of the "Moroccan Wall" may not include the normal trappings of a state - as I understand it their HQ and media are actually based in Algeria - any more up-to-date information gratefully received.

Offline

#394 2016-08-05 13:23:01

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Moin,

hier die aktuelle Missing Boundaries-Auswertung: https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.ph … 2016-08-05

Der Datenstand ist von 2016-08-05 02:05:01+02

9 Missings und kein kritisches Multipolygon.

Großbritannien hat es erwischt. Blödsinn, die Auswertung war da noch nicht vorbei gekommen,
   
Gruss
walter

Last edited by wambacher (2016-08-05 14:17:01)

Offline

#395 2016-08-05 13:35:59

EzekielT
Member
Registered: 2016-08-05
Posts: 18

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Well, the last thing we saw on this issue was 4rch giving up, after maybe 10 times restoring the border. The people who deleted it are pro-Moroccan. We need someone in between.

Offline

#396 2016-08-05 13:41:31

EzekielT
Member
Registered: 2016-08-05
Posts: 18

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

Maybe someone can message the pro-Moroccans and see if they are okay with restoring the border.

Offline

#397 2016-08-05 13:41:47

wambacher
Member
From: Schlangenbad/Wambach, Germany
Registered: 2009-12-16
Posts: 16,246
Website

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

SomeoneElse wrote:

As I understand it (based on reading about the situation, not on any local knowledge) the Polisario / SADR control east of the "Moroccan Wall" may not include the normal trappings of a state - as I understand it their HQ and media are actually based in Algeria - any more up-to-date information gratefully received.

May be, this is ok?

First: it's no part of Morocco
2.nd : it's a part of Western Sahara controlled by the Polisario

May be, we let a gap there? Better than the actual situation.

Or as disputed area inside of Western Sahara?
300px-Westernsaharamap.png

not shure of that

Regards
walter

Offline

#398 2016-08-05 13:52:47

EzekielT
Member
Registered: 2016-08-05
Posts: 18

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

There are many maps that feature Western Sahara as a country.. However, if we want to keep to OSM standards, knowing that Kosovo is admin_level=2, SADR, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia should be returned as countries (admin_level=2).

Offline

#399 2016-08-05 19:56:36

SomeoneElse
Member
Registered: 2010-10-13
Posts: 1,134

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

@EzekielT (re admin_level=2) these all need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. Simon posted this somewhere (probably IRC) recently and it's a good explainer if you haven't seen it already:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AivEQmfPpk

In the case of Kosovo, you can read back up this thread (actually last year's thread) for the discussion.  The status of places like Transnistria and the "frozen conflict" remnants south of Russia is more complicated, but the last time I looked, the situation there was no more confusing that the actual situation on the ground.  It's difficult for OSM to "get it right" all of the time (for example, I see some comedian has changed Sealand http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/363076217 back to admin_level=2) but we can try - and about the only certainty is that if someone offers a glib statement that says "it's obvious, problematical area X is obviously a country" is that they're almost definitely wrong, or at least haven't thought about it enough.

That's why in the case of Western Sahara I'm trying to get opinions from all sides - the "desired situations of the various protagonists" obviously differ from each other, but these both also as I undertand it differ from the UN's official position and those all differ from the situation on the ground - and individual states' positions are also tempered by their need to work with other states "on the other side" of the Western Sahara conflict due to common interests elsewhere, so "what they say" may not match "what they do".

For a more in-depth read on how this works in the real world, maybe have a read of https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/ … s-al-qaida (and ignore the clickbait headline - the article goes on to discuss why "terrorist" isn't a particularly useful word here).

Last edited by SomeoneElse (2016-08-05 20:16:46)

Offline

#400 2016-08-05 20:02:38

SomeoneElse
Member
Registered: 2010-10-13
Posts: 1,134

Re: [closed] Internationale Admingrenzen 2016

@wambacher (re "the gap") Various people have in the past had a go at mapping the "restricted areas" (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Zone_%28region%29 for info).  I'm not sure what remains of them in OSM - If anyone wants to make a border recommendation based on them, great - but I suspect it'll be the people in this thread who'll be maintaining it :-)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB