> > b) From Maa-amet: Borders are in Maaregister from Baaskaart. Into > > Baaskaart they were digitized from old topographical maps, without any > > proper legal base (no official coordinates). So these are technically > > "arbitrary" lines. > > *gosh* > > So I understand that there are indeed borders on the water?! Only they don't > mean anything in reality.
I would say that there are borders, and they also mean something (when there is discussion into which vald an islet belongs), but Maamet just does not want to make them too public. Their excuse is that if there is dispute then they cannot defend them legally, as there is no proper law behind them (like there is for land borders). The borders are in Maaregister and Maaregister is already the official border source for municipalities; the legal issue is when someone starts to ask what is behind the borders there, then Maaamet has no good answer for it. They had one specific disputed example also (http://arielu.ee/est/harju/keila/?news=945658&category=1&Keila-vallal-on-nu udsest-oma-saar). Typical head to the sand strategy. > But what about the Maaregister? Is this what the Maa-amet shape files > represent? It should be same, with the exception of water borders, which border info is delibrately hidden by using shoreline instead. _______________________________________________ Talk-ee mailing list Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
