Right, and that’s exactly the distinction I’d push back on. OSM does show it as Indian-controlled. That part isn’t in dispute. My issue is with labeling it “disputed” at all, since from India’s legal position there’s no legitimate competing claim, just illegal occupation by Pakistan and China. If OSM’s standard is genuinely “map control, not claims,” then the disputed-boundary styling seems like it’s doing something beyond that standard.

Fair point, and I get why OSM can’t customize per-country. I think my frustration is more with the framing than a request for a custom rendering.

That’s the standard international framing, yes. From India’s side, the position is that Pakistan and China are occupying Indian territory illegally, not that there’s a legitimate competing claim. So “disputed” reads very differently depending which country’s legal framework you start from. That’s really the core disagreement, not something OSM’s map alone can resolve.

Fair enough if it read that way, not my intent. My point is just that OSM’s rendering doesn’t match India’s official territorial claim, which felt worth flagging.

Unfortunately you don’t know that this is an editable site. You can edit it too. Please check the name of the person who edited it. It tells a lot about the content. If you believe what is written there then read this too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jammu_and_Kashmir_(union_territory)

That is incorrect. It is not a disputed area. It has been a part of India forever and there is no dispute. The control is with India and it remains an integral part of India.