District boundaries: why maps disagree and which to trust

Look up the limits of one district in two different sources and you will find two different shapes. Neither is wrong — they differ in source and in purpose.

Three sources, three purposes

The approved municipal boundary

Drawn by the municipality and used for planning, services and addressing. This is the administrative reference.

The cadastral boundary

Comes from the deed and the approved plan, and defines ownership. This is the legal reference — and it does not usually appear on display maps.

The approximate boundary

Drawn by volunteers on open maps. Useful for general orientation, with accuracy that varies district by district.

How we show them here

The district map on this platform separates the two visually:

• **Solid line** — an approved municipal boundary, with its official area
• **Dashed line** — an approximate boundary from the open map

Below the map is a counter for each type and the name of the authority behind the official ones.

The reason for the distinction: anyone looking at a drawn polygon assumes it is precise. The shape itself says approximate before the disclaimer is read.

Coverage is uneven — that is the data, not the code

Makkah has 132 approved boundaries from the Holy Makkah Municipality with official areas. Riyadh has 152 approximate ones from the open map. Other cities record their districts as points rather than polygons, so they have no boundary at all.

What this means in practice

• **For browsing and search** — an approximate boundary is entirely sufficient
• **For comparing prices between districts** — note that a different boundary changes the sample
• **For ownership or disputes** — neither is suitable. Only the deed and approved plan apply

Any boundary you see on any display map — here or elsewhere — is an orientation tool, not a title document.