Re: [talk-ph] best practice for village admin_centre relations

2015-07-05 Thread maning sambale
Thanks for all the advise. I think I've fixed all of Markina's village/brgy admin_centres http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/agI On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Rally de Leon rall...@gmail.com wrote: Erwin, Confused: I thought all along that the subject about the admin-polygon-relation's center

Re: [talk-ph] best practice for village admin_centre relations

2015-07-02 Thread Erwin Olario
Rally, Maning is asking about the administrative centres, and that would mean government authorities in charge of administration. They are not meant to represent the [geographic] center of the village which isn't something we normally map. As for place=village nodes, and like I wrote earlier, I

Re: [talk-ph] best practice for village admin_centre relations

2015-07-02 Thread Rally de Leon
Erwin, Confused: I thought all along that the subject about the admin-polygon-relation's center (whatever that means). :-) That normally, in the absence of a member 'admin_centre' node in the relation, the name-TEXT of that administrative polygon is rendered in its geometric center. BUT,

Re: [talk-ph] best practice for village admin_centre relations

2015-07-02 Thread Rally de Leon
Question: - What's the best practice for adding admin_centre nodes to the village boundary relation? Should it be the barangay hall (amenity=townhall) or the place=village node? For place nodes, a good practice IMHO is putting said node (eg. place=village) somewhere NEAR but NOT ON

[talk-ph] best practice for village admin_centre relations

2015-07-01 Thread maning sambale
Hi, Normally, I mark the location for place=village to where the barangay hall is located. What's the best practice for adding admin_centre nodes to the village boundary relation? Should it be the barangay hall (amenity=townhall) or the place=village node? -- cheers, maning