Serbian - Bulgarian border

Currently there are at least four near-overlapping boundary lines at the Serbian-Bulgarian border in the Stara planina region.

Now, I would like to eliminate the boundary lines for the latter three and make them share the official boundary, but – which one is correct? Sometimes they match one another or the state border, but they all deviate from one another on several places, for up to few hundred meters, notably around the peak of Vrazha glava.

@Branko_Kokanovic was last conflating the state boundary with the official Serbian cadastral data ( OSMCha 117608549 ) , but I’m not sure if it was manual or bot work. If he can confirm (and Bulgarian colleagues approve) it’s the correct boundary, I would like to use it as the common boundary line and eliminate all others.

Yes, I conflated boundary using Serbian open data manually! Trying to fix it as best as I could, but without deviating too much from what was in OSM (and following boundary stones already in OSM).

I can confirm that this is not what Bulgarian collegules would claim as correct boundary:) Serbia and Bulgaria have different views on this boundary, to say nicely:) I was in contact with @plamen and he pointed me to (click “Административни граници”).

I eyeballed it and there are no “big” differences. Maybe areas here are where difference is biggest: Way: 1063344753 | OpenStreetMap Way: 793095621 | OpenStreetMap (both boundary claim these ways:)

Funnily enough, I found two parts where neither country claim it: Way: 539263639 | OpenStreetMap Node: 9580658953 | OpenStreetMap

I think we can either:
a) sync with Bulgarian collegues and have admin line go in the midpoints from what both countries claim (and fix national parks etc.)
b) keep two boundaries and have claimed_administrative tag for both (I hope we don’t get to this:D)
c) keep boundary as it is today and just snap national parks to it (maybe not fair to either Serb or Bulgarians?)
d) just do nothing as we are not doing anything:)

Hopefully someone from Bulgaria will chime in!

I prefer variant “A”. Anyway, in the future, it could be improved in one way or another. You can add some tag “to be confirmed and fixed” or similar.
In my opinion, both sides are using old paper sources giving big deviations when digitalized.

1 Like