Great article, especially the diagram! Really cool to reflect on the tagging system from this perspective.

As a member of the Ukrainian OSM community, I want to say that your feelings deeply resonate with me. I understand the frustration when political realities are treated as neutral facts on a map — especially when those “facts” stem from military occupations or violations of international law.

I honestly don’t know what the best solution is when it comes to handling disputed territories within a global volunteer project like OSM, or if a truly fair solution is even possible. But I do believe that the so-called neutrality of the “on-the-ground control” principle is deeply flawed. A map of borders is inherently political — it reflects choices, values, and interpretations of legitimacy. Pretending that “physical control” alone is apolitical oversimplifies very real and painful histories for many communities.

We are all contributors from different countries, backgrounds, and political contexts. It’s unrealistic to expect that a single mapping policy can feel fair or neutral to everyone, especially when it echoes the logic of the aggressor.

Hi @neuhausr, Thanks a lot for your kind words about the improved design — I really appreciate it! Just a note that the version shown here is slightly outdated — the latest version has already been updated on the wiki at this link: osm.wiki/File:Railway-station-tagging.svg

In the latest version, the yellow callout now includes the text “Members of the relation, highlighted in yellow” to help make that connection clearer. Still, thank you for the thoughtful suggestion — it’s a valuable point!

@tordans, thanks for the feedback! I’ll try to implement it in the new version of the diagram. In the meantime, please check out the current version in the OpenStreetMap community discussion thread. Feel free to join the discussion there, as the version posted here is already quite outdated.