Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Alex S.]

Lukasz Stelmach wrote:
> Martijn Verwijmeren wrote:
>> It is fairly common for larger cities and even small towns in the US to
>> lie in more than one county.
> 
> Do those cities have their own administration that cooperates with all 
> the counties?

   The town of Bothell in Washington straddles the border between King 
and Snohomish counties.
   The town of Bothell has their own police force which can and does 
patrol the entire town, but the King County Sheriff can only patrol 
within Bothell the portion that is inside the boundary of King county.
   Etc.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lukasz Stelmach]

Martijn Verwijmeren wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:11:03 +0100
Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My point is that as far as the administration and adminstrative 
boundaries are conserned, they do coincide.


No, they don't. Reading the wikipedia stuff you linked:

"Kansas City is the largest city in the state of Missouri. It
encompasses 318 square miles in parts of Jackson, Clay, Cass, and
Platte counties."

It is fairly common for larger cities and even small towns in the US to
lie in more than one county.


Do those cities have their own administration that cooperates with 
all the counties?



--
Było mi bardzo miło.   Czwarta pospolita klęska, [...]
>Łukasz< Już nie katolicka lecz złodziejska.  (c)PP


--
Rozdajemy nagrody! 


Sprawdz >> http://link.interia.pl/f1cbf

begin:vcard
fn;quoted-printable:=C5=81ukasz Stelmach
n;quoted-printable:Stelmach;=C5=81ukasz
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lester Caine]

Lukasz Stelmach wrote:
> Please, are we talking about administrative boundaries? OK about 
> boundaries and is_in. That is the problem. I think, and I do it, that, 
> is in should reflect administrative structure. Not at all levels but 
> most. E.g.
> 
> place=country,name=Polska,name:en=Poland,is_in=Europe
> 
> but
> 
> place=town,name=Mszczonów,is_in=Mszczonów,żyrardowski,mazowieckie,Polska

The discussion probably needs to be split.
the is_in tab SHOULD be dropped altogether since the other alternative is 
insisting that every entry has an is_in tag?
PROVIDING an is_in result from areas contained on the map is the correct way 
of doing things in the future, but adding hundreds of thousands of 
is_in=Mszczonów,żyrardowski,mazowieckie,Polska type tags is just going to make 
the raw data unmanageable.

( As some of you will know I HATE tags anyway - from a data storage point of 
view they are simply wrong, and if there was a unique 'place' table with 
proper hierarchical links, then the 'żyrardowski,mazowieckie,Polska' would 
just be read from the 'Mszczonów' entry - and we could add alternate language 
versions as well ! )

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Martijn Verwijmeren]

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:11:03 +0100
Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Robin Paulson wrote:
> > On 11/01/2008, Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> the kansas city metro area lies in missouri and kansas (US)
> >> Ok, how about its administration. To which governor must a mayor of
> >> kansas city suck up? I'm pretty sure that not to both. Maybe the
> >> "metro area" has som independence? Then I would draw it like this.
> > 
> > yes, that may be true, but still boundaries at a high level do not
> > have to coincide with boundaries at a low level. i think that was
> > where this all started
> 
> My point is that as far as the administration and adminstrative 
> boundaries are conserned, they do coincide.
> 

No, they don't. Reading the wikipedia stuff you linked:

"Kansas City is the largest city in the state of Missouri. It
encompasses 318 square miles in parts of Jackson, Clay, Cass, and
Platte counties."

It is fairly common for larger cities and even small towns in the US to
lie in more than one county.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Robin Paulson]

On 11/01/2008, Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - The border of a country is not the coastline, but (at the very
> least) 12 nautical miles from the coastline and in some places, much
> further than that.

ok, let's say i wanted to use this as a basis for drawing the national
boundary for a country. i appreciate that part of the border will be
more than 12nm away from the coast (depending on the depth of the
ocean floor, yes?), but it's a good start

does some enterprising coder want to come up with a way of
automagically drawing the border at a 12nm offset to the coastline?
anywhere that the border is different, i would be happy to edit it
manually, if a large part of it was being done by programmatic means

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lukasz Stelmach]

Robin Paulson wrote:

On 11/01/2008, Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

the kansas city metro area lies in missouri and kansas (US)

Ok, how about its administration. To which governor must a mayor of
kansas city suck up? I'm pretty sure that not to both. Maybe the
"metro area" has som independence? Then I would draw it like this.


yes, that may be true, but still boundaries at a high level do not
have to coincide with boundaries at a low level. i think that was
where this all started


My point is that as far as the administration and adminstrative 
boundaries are conserned, they do coincide.


--
Było mi bardzo miło.   Czwarta pospolita klęska, [...]
>Łukasz< Już nie katolicka lecz złodziejska.  (c)PP



--
Stworz najlepsza modelke na swiecie!
Sprawdz >>> http://link.interia.pl/f1cc4
begin:vcard
fn;quoted-printable:=C5=81ukasz Stelmach
n;quoted-printable:Stelmach;=C5=81ukasz
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Ben Laenen]

Speaking of enclaves: it's fun to see how AND didn't do that small extra 
effort to include the missing bits of information here: :-p 
http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=51.43816923752404&lon=4.92520170283133&zoom=14&layers=B000F000F

And staying in Belgium, I have to give you the Belgian regions and 
communities: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_communities 
They're all adminstrative divisions, all with their own parliaments, so 
that would be fun to tag, or to discuss whether regions or communities 
should have a higher admin_level...

Greetings
Ben


On Thursday 10 January 2008, Tony Bowden wrote:
> Robin Paulson wrote:
> >> Do you mean that a commune (the lowest level of self government)
> >> can be part of more than one unit of each of higher levels? Like
> >> this?
> >
> > yes. some examples:
> > i think turkey lies partly in europe, partly in asia?
>
> There are other examples at even this high a level as well.
>
> Parts of France are in South America (lots of people are surprised to
> find that Brazil has a land border with the EU). Parts of Spain are
> in Africa (Melilla, Ceuta, etc).
>
> And there lots of towns or cities that are in different geographic
> countries than administrative ones (Campione and Büsingen are Italian
> and German towns in Switzerland, Llívia a Spanish town in France,
> etc)
>
> Usually these are enclaves or exclaves, so slightly easier to deal
> with, but we need to constantly remember that the world is a very
> tricky thing to model, with large numbers of quirky edge cases.
>
> Tony

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lukasz Stelmach]

Tony Bowden wrote:

Robin Paulson wrote:

Do you mean that a commune (the lowest level of self government) can
be part of more than one unit of each of higher levels? Like this?

yes. some examples:
i think turkey lies partly in europe, partly in asia?


There are other examples at even this high a level as well.

Parts of France are in South America (lots of people are surprised to 
find that Brazil has a land border with the EU). Parts of Spain are in 
Africa (Melilla, Ceuta, etc).


Please, are we talking about administrative boundaries? OK about 
boundaries and is_in. That is the problem. I think, and I do it, 
that, is in should reflect administrative structure. Not at all 
levels but most. E.g.


place=country,name=Polska,name:en=Poland,is_in=Europe

but

place=town,name=Mszczonów,is_in=Mszczonów,żyrardowski,mazowieckie,Polska

Mszczonów is the name of the town as well as the name of the commune 
(the first element of is_in). Next there are two levels of Polish 
administration, and the name of the country.


For this French territory in South America it would be.

place=country,name=Guyane,is_in=South America

then

place=city,name=Cayaenne,is_in=Guyane,...

Guyane becomes something kind of country in terms of OSM logic.
Its connection with France is not essential in any way for drwaing a 
map.


I've been thinking about connection between boundaries (ways) and 
places (nodes) recently and the only method that occured to me OK 
was *boudary_of* tag with a value of the id of the place node. 
However I havn't thought about it in terms of relations, yet.



--
Było mi bardzo miło.   Czwarta pospolita klęska, [...]
>Łukasz< Już nie katolicka lecz złodziejska.  (c)PP



--
Chcesz kupic aparat? Sprawdz, ktory jest najlepszy!
Kliknij >>> http://link.interia.pl/f1cd3
begin:vcard
fn;quoted-printable:=C5=81ukasz Stelmach
n;quoted-printable:Stelmach;=C5=81ukasz
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Robin Paulson]

On 11/01/2008, Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robin Paulson wrote:
> > On 11/01/2008, Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Do you mean that a commune (the lowest level of self government) can
> >> be part of more than one unit of each of higher levels? Like this?
> >
> > yes. some examples:
> >
> > Franklin district in new zealand lies partly in auckland region,
> > partly in waikato region
>
> Are those regions admistrative units? I've never been to New Zeland,
> it's the other end of the world for me ;)

yes. i'm not well up on it, maybe franklin is entirely governed by the
ARC (auckland regional council) for simplicity's sake? OTOH,
government is rarely logical

> > i think turkey lies partly in europe, partly in asia?
>
> Bad example ;-) We there are no comtinental governments, yet.
> Spealing about administrative boundaries.

ok, but we still need to distinguish between the two. i think i've
lost sight of where this discussion was going.

> > the kansas city metro area lies in missouri and kansas (US)
>
> Ok, how about its administration. To which governor must a mayor of
> kansas city suck up? I'm pretty sure that not to both. Maybe the
> "metro area" has som independence? Then I would draw it like this.

yes, that may be true, but still boundaries at a high level do not
have to coincide with boundaries at a low level. i think that was
where this all started

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lukasz Stelmach]

Robin Paulson wrote:

On 11/01/2008, Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Do you mean that a commune (the lowest level of self government) can
be part of more than one unit of each of higher levels? Like this?


yes. some examples:

Franklin district in new zealand lies partly in auckland region,
partly in waikato region


Are those regions admistrative units? I've never been to New Zeland, 
it's the other end of the world for me ;)



i think turkey lies partly in europe, partly in asia?


Bad example ;-) We there are no comtinental governments, yet.
Spealing about administrative boundaries.


the kansas city metro area lies in missouri and kansas (US)


Ok, how about its administration. To which governor must a mayor of 
kansas city suck up? I'm pretty sure that not to both. Maybe the 
"metro area" has som independence? Then I would draw it like this.


 \
  \
kansas \
   /\
   \/
  |  missouri
  |


Hey wait, why do I have to invent things
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_City,_Missouri
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_City,_Kansas

OK, speaking in terms of US. No county lies in two states.


--
Było mi bardzo miło.   Czwarta pospolita klęska, [...]
>Łukasz< Już nie katolicka lecz złodziejska.  (c)PP


--
Rozdajemy nagrody! 


Sprawdz >> http://link.interia.pl/f1cbf

begin:vcard
fn;quoted-printable:=C5=81ukasz Stelmach
n;quoted-printable:Stelmach;=C5=81ukasz
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Tony Bowden]

Robin Paulson wrote:
>> Do you mean that a commune (the lowest level of self government) can
>> be part of more than one unit of each of higher levels? Like this?
> yes. some examples:
> i think turkey lies partly in europe, partly in asia?

There are other examples at even this high a level as well.

Parts of France are in South America (lots of people are surprised to 
find that Brazil has a land border with the EU). Parts of Spain are in 
Africa (Melilla, Ceuta, etc).

And there lots of towns or cities that are in different geographic 
countries than administrative ones (Campione and Büsingen are Italian 
and German towns in Switzerland, Llívia a Spanish town in France, etc)

Usually these are enclaves or exclaves, so slightly easier to deal with, 
but we need to constantly remember that the world is a very tricky thing 
to model, with large numbers of quirky edge cases.

Tony




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Robin Paulson]

On 11/01/2008, Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> What is more important to me, and this is question for all who know,
> >> how to cope boundaries *between* two areas, like administrative
> >> ones? How to cope with boundaries of different administrative
> >> levels? If a line is a boundary between communes it is also a
> >> boundry of respective provinces.
> >
> > Not necessarily - it could be at the moment, or it could not be. There
> > are examples (in the UK at least) of overlaps.
>
> Do you mean that a commune (the lowest level of self government) can
> be part of more than one unit of each of higher levels? Like this?

yes. some examples:

Franklin district in new zealand lies partly in auckland region,
partly in waikato region

i think turkey lies partly in europe, partly in asia?

the kansas city metro area lies in missouri and kansas (US)

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lukasz Stelmach]

Thomas Wood wrote:

On Jan 10, 2008 6:34 PM, Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

[...]

What is more important to me, and this is question for all who know,
how to cope boundaries *between* two areas, like administrative
ones? How to cope with boundaries of different administrative
levels? If a line is a boundary between communes it is also a
boundry of respective provinces.


Not necessarily - it could be at the moment, or it could not be. There
are examples (in the UK at least) of overlaps.


Do you mean that a commune (the lowest level of self government) can 
be part of more than one unit of each of higher levels? Like this?



\
 \_:_  <-  C1
  :::\::
::\:
 P1| P2
\
/

I am talking here about administrative boundaries not some sort of 
customary ones.


I haven't written that earlier but what should I do if the boundary 
goes along some other way like railroad, river or highway? Should I 
draw another way right besides the road or tag one way as both the 
road and the boundary?


If the former then I think sooner or later we should develop 
separate layers for different features of the map. Editing could be 
much easier then.


--
Było mi bardzo miło.   Czwarta pospolita klęska, [...]
>Łukasz< Już nie katolicka lecz złodziejska.  (c)PP



--
Sprawdz, ktore komorki sa najmodniejsze!
Kliknij >>> http://link.interia.pl/f1cd4
begin:vcard
fn;quoted-printable:=C5=81ukasz Stelmach
n;quoted-printable:Stelmach;=C5=81ukasz
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Thomas Wood]

On Jan 10, 2008 6:34 PM, Lukasz Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robin Paulson wrote:
> > can someone explain a few things about the way boundaries work, and
> > their relation to the is_in key?
> >
> > as far as i can tell, when a location (say the suburb of balham, in
> > london) is added to the map, the is_in tag needs to be set, multiple
> > times. in this case, it would be set as follows:
> >
> > is_in:Westminster (...i think)
> > is_in:greater london
> > is_in:england
> > is_in:united_kingdom
> > is_in:British_Isles
> > is_in:Great_Britain
> > is_in:Europe
> > ...etc.
> >
> > which seems counter-intuitive, not to mention requiring huge amounts
> > of work. do we set this for every item - roads, churches,
> > supermarkets,thousands of other items?
>
> What I do is putting is_in only on places and I do it rather like
> this: Westminster,greater london,england,united_kingdom,etc. Even
> when I map a few villages in an areay JOSM autocompletes that.
>

My view on this is that relation support should be quickly improved in
the editors.
Relations will add more structure to the current mess of the freeform is_in tag.

>
> > my second, related, point concerns boundaries that coincide with
> > coastlines: do we need to trace over the coastline of a
> > country/city/suburb to define an unbroken loop for each administrative
> > areas,
>
> After reading
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:boundary
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Talk:Key:boundary#Expanded_usage
> I would not bother.
>
> What is more important to me, and this is question for all who know,
> how to cope boundaries *between* two areas, like administrative
> ones? How to cope with boundaries of different administrative
> levels? If a line is a boundary between communes it is also a
> boundry of respective provinces.

Not necessarily - it could be at the moment, or it could not be. There
are examples (in the UK at least) of overlaps.
This issue has been debated in IRC, I cannot remember if the proposal
that was made there has been transferred to the wiki yet.

Unbroken loops are not required, but it is possible to do it in that
fashion. However, the current convention of tagging left-right should
require less effort in the long run.

> Both webpages above seem to be quite vague about it, or at best
> unofficial.

It's not gone through voting, but nothing is really 'official', the
page could probably do with a little tidying though.

I'll have a read over the whole topic again later and see if I can
bring up any points not yet mentioned.

-- 
Regards,
Thomas Wood
(Edgemaster)

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lukasz Stelmach]

Robin Paulson wrote:

can someone explain a few things about the way boundaries work, and
their relation to the is_in key?

as far as i can tell, when a location (say the suburb of balham, in
london) is added to the map, the is_in tag needs to be set, multiple
times. in this case, it would be set as follows:

is_in:Westminster (...i think)
is_in:greater london
is_in:england
is_in:united_kingdom
is_in:British_Isles
is_in:Great_Britain
is_in:Europe
...etc.

which seems counter-intuitive, not to mention requiring huge amounts
of work. do we set this for every item - roads, churches,
supermarkets,thousands of other items?


What I do is putting is_in only on places and I do it rather like
this: Westminster,greater london,england,united_kingdom,etc. Even
when I map a few villages in an areay JOSM autocompletes that.



my second, related, point concerns boundaries that coincide with
coastlines: do we need to trace over the coastline of a
country/city/suburb to define an unbroken loop for each administrative
areas, 


After reading
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:boundary
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Talk:Key:boundary#Expanded_usage
I would not bother.

What is more important to me, and this is question for all who know,
how to cope boundaries *between* two areas, like administrative
ones? How to cope with boundaries of different administrative
levels? If a line is a boundary between communes it is also a
boundry of respective provinces.

Both webpages above seem to be quite vague about it, or at best
unofficial.

--
Było mi bardzo miło.   Czwarta pospolita klęska, [...]
 >Łukasz< Już nie katolicka lecz złodziejska.  (c)PP




--
Chcesz kupic aparat? Sprawdz, ktory jest najlepszy!
Kliknij >>> http://link.interia.pl/f1cd3
begin:vcard
fn;quoted-printable:=C5=81ukasz Stelmach
n;quoted-printable:Stelmach;=C5=81ukasz
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Karl Newman]

On Jan 10, 2008 8:55 AM, Abigail Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Jan 10, 2008 4:37 PM, Karl Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Really? Trying to future-proof against hierarchies that have been around
> > for (in some cases) millenia? Ooh, I know, we could have negative numbers to
> > indicate planet, solar system, galaxy, etc. For future interstellar use.
> >
>
> I'm not going to even bother explaining further you're going to take that
> attitude.
>
> Please go away.
>

Oh, brother. Can't tolerate a little sarcasm?

The scheme just seems a little vague to me. As it is, it's difficult to
correlate similar concepts across countries using this method. i.e., what's
a city? It's pretty well-defined in the US where there's not a lot of
historical baggage, but it's more complex in other countries, and only a few
countries have provided specific local definitions for the admin levels.
Adding more levels will not make the process easier. Which level do I pick
if I want to know what city a street is part of?

Karl
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Abigail Brady]

On Jan 10, 2008 4:37 PM, Karl Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Really? Trying to future-proof against hierarchies that have been around
> for (in some cases) millenia? Ooh, I know, we could have negative numbers to
> indicate planet, solar system, galaxy, etc. For future interstellar use.
>

I'm not going to even bother explaining further you're going to take that
attitude.

Please go away.

-- 
Abi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Karl Newman]

On Jan 10, 2008 12:53 AM, Abigail Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Jan 9, 2008 11:50 PM, Karl Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I understand why numbers are used instead of names. My question is why
> > are there no odd numbers listed? It just looked strange.
> >
>
> Future-proofing.  It leaves gaps so that if new units are invented that
> fit between existing ones you can make them be '3' or '5', etc, without
> having to renumber everything else.
>
> --
> Abi
>

Really? Trying to future-proof against hierarchies that have been around for
(in some cases) millenia? Ooh, I know, we could have negative numbers to
indicate planet, solar system, galaxy, etc. For future interstellar use.

Karl
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Martijn van Oosterhout]

On Jan 10, 2008 10:32 AM, 80n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Having multiple ways of achieving the same (or similar) results is not a bad
> thing.  Each will have it's own strengths an weaknesses.

Two points:

- There's no reason why you can't stick an admin boundary on a
natural=coastline way.
- The border of a country is not the coastline, but (at the very
least) 12 nautical miles from the coastline and in some places, much
further than that.

I have no idea boundaries for local councils, I imagine they're
responsible for the beaches in their area, so it does extend beyond
the coastline itself.

Have a nice day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://svana.org/kleptog/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lester Caine]

Abigail Brady wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2008 11:29 AM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > wrote:
> 
> You are almost right for the bigger administrative areas, but parish
> and ward
> boundaries are regularly on the move. I'm just working out how to
> handle a
> couple of changes in other work I'm doing :(
> 
> 
> Ah, but wards are electoral. :)

Yes but they can move between administrative areas :)
The English county boundaries list has changes for every year from 1991 to 
2000, but since then things have stabilised at that level. Ward and parish 
boundary changes tend to go together and are still changing so local 
administrative areas are still variable.

It would be nice to be able to select a ward and see it's boundary, and 
perhaps if we can get access to the nlpg data that can be automatic. But until 
they open access to it 

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Abigail Brady]

On Jan 10, 2008 11:29 AM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> You are almost right for the bigger administrative areas, but parish and
> ward
> boundaries are regularly on the move. I'm just working out how to handle a
> couple of changes in other work I'm doing :(
>

Ah, but wards are electoral. :)

-- 
Abi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Abigail Brady]

On Jan 10, 2008 11:35 AM, Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Is Greater London debatable or for a mapping/administritive meaning are
> you counting the outside boundaries of the London Boroughs?
>
> I personally do it by the London Transport zone, as your generally need a
> 10-12minute bus service so it feels like London. By friends in the next
> suburb define Greater London by the M25, which would include them and lots
> of fields.
>

Greater London has a specific meaning under the London Government Act 1963,
and anyone claiming anything else is outright wrong.

'London' is a term of debate.

-- 
Abi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Gregory]

On 10/01/2008, Abigail Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 10, 2008 11:06 AM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Stephen Gower wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:11:35PM +1300, Robin Paulson wrote:
> > >> the boundary data should be relatively easy to come by
> > >
> > >   Not where it isn't marked on the ground, and is only defined by
> > >   reference to the Copyrighted national mapping.  The is the case in
> > >   many places in the UK.
> >
> > AND it is changed each year or so by the Boundary Commission :)
> >
>
> Administrative boundary changes (as opposed to electoral ones) are in fact
> relatively rare and usually make boundaries follow more easily identified
> features (for example, the external border of Greater London in many places
> now follows the M25, as opposed to the line of nearby ancient hedges which
> may or not be there any more).
>
> --
> Abi
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
Is Greater London debatable or for a mapping/administritive meaning are you
counting the outside boundaries of the London Boroughs?

I personally do it by the London Transport zone, as your generally need a
10-12minute bus service so it feels like London. By friends in the next
suburb define Greater London by the M25, which would include them and lots
of fields.


-- 
Gregory
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.livingwithdragons.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lester Caine]

Abigail Brady wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2008 11:06 AM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > wrote:
> 
> Stephen Gower wrote:
>  > On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:11:35PM +1300, Robin Paulson wrote:
>  >> the boundary data should be relatively easy to come by
>  >
>  >   Not where it isn't marked on the ground, and is only defined by
>  >   reference to the Copyrighted national mapping.  The is the case in
>  >   many places in the UK.
> 
> AND it is changed each year or so by the Boundary Commission :)
> 
> 
> Administrative boundary changes (as opposed to electoral ones) are in 
> fact relatively rare and usually make boundaries follow more easily 
> identified features (for example, the external border of Greater London 
> in many places now follows the M25, as opposed to the line of nearby 
> ancient hedges which may or not be there any more).

You are almost right for the bigger administrative areas, but parish and ward 
boundaries are regularly on the move. I'm just working out how to handle a 
couple of changes in other work I'm doing :(

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Abigail Brady]

On Jan 10, 2008 11:06 AM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Stephen Gower wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:11:35PM +1300, Robin Paulson wrote:
> >> the boundary data should be relatively easy to come by
> >
> >   Not where it isn't marked on the ground, and is only defined by
> >   reference to the Copyrighted national mapping.  The is the case in
> >   many places in the UK.
>
> AND it is changed each year or so by the Boundary Commission :)
>

Administrative boundary changes (as opposed to electoral ones) are in fact
relatively rare and usually make boundaries follow more easily identified
features (for example, the external border of Greater London in many places
now follows the M25, as opposed to the line of nearby ancient hedges which
may or not be there any more).

-- 
Abi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lester Caine]

Stephen Gower wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:11:35PM +1300, Robin Paulson wrote:
>> the boundary data should be relatively easy to come by
> 
>   Not where it isn't marked on the ground, and is only defined by
>   reference to the Copyrighted national mapping.  The is the case in
>   many places in the UK.

AND it is changed each year or so by the Boundary Commission :)

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Stephen Gower]

On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 10:11:35PM +1300, Robin Paulson wrote:
> 
> the boundary data should be relatively easy to come by

  Not where it isn't marked on the ground, and is only defined by
  reference to the Copyrighted national mapping.  The is the case in
  many places in the UK.
  
  s

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Michael Collinson]

At 10:11 AM 1/10/2008, Robin Paulson wrote:
>On 10/01/2008, Michael Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >which seems counter-intuitive, not to mention requiring huge amounts
> > >of work. do we set this for every item - roads, churches,
> > >supermarkets,thousands of other items?
> > >is there anything underway to enable OSM to calculate where an object
> > >is, based upon knowledge of administrative boundaries - after all,
> > >they are only a polygon-shaped bounding box?
> >
> > Yes, sort of.  But the other way around, I am working on deriving
> > administrative boundaries from "is_in" and "place" tags. *If* it
> > works, the answer to your main question would be to randomly use
> > is_in tags on low level items such as roads and churches and let the
> > computer work out a boundary around them.  I should be able to report
> > back in February.
>
>sorry mike, i'm sure you've put a lot of work in, but that sounds even
>more backwards, and very difficult to control well - i foresee a lot
>of fudging to make it work in a lot of areas.
>
>the boundary data should be relatively easy to come by, and require a
>*lot* less points to be drawn/edited, than your method. plus, your
>method is never going to be one hundred percent perfect. for example,
>what happens in areas of open country side, with no POIs to mark, when
>the boundary changes direction - something that will happen a lot?
>and what when a place is in two administrative boundaries? there are
>fairly major cities that straddle for instance state lines in the US.
>i think arkansas may be one?
>
>but i guess itches should be scratchedsomething will doubtless
>come from this, whether unintended or not. ok, it'll be interesting to
>see your results

Robin, yes all your points are valid except I think getting accurate 
boundary data globally without violating copyrights will prove a long 
drawn out process.  Hope I'm wrong!  Meanwhile, mining the is_in mass 
observation resource indeed gives me an itch I've been longing to scratch.

I should have made one important qualification and that is my main 
interest is really "is near" rather than "is in", so I'm not so 
worried about precise boundaries - only place in the world, the rough 
areal extent and a reasonable low resolution approximation of shape, 
in that order of priority.  I think this is very important for 
searching.  On a local scale, it probably more useful to search for a 
street on the outskirts of Balham rather than determining for sure 
whether it is in Balham or the next suburb. At a wide scale, I'm 
hoping it will provide an easy method to zero in on San Francisco 
California when searching for "San Francisco, USA" without returning 
small villages in Spain and the Philippines.

Mike


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[80n]

On Jan 10, 2008 9:11 AM, Robin Paulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On 10/01/2008, Michael Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >which seems counter-intuitive, not to mention requiring huge amounts
> > >of work. do we set this for every item - roads, churches,
> > >supermarkets,thousands of other items?
> > >is there anything underway to enable OSM to calculate where an object
> > >is, based upon knowledge of administrative boundaries - after all,
> > >they are only a polygon-shaped bounding box?
> >
> > Yes, sort of.  But the other way around, I am working on deriving
> > administrative boundaries from "is_in" and "place" tags. *If* it
> > works, the answer to your main question would be to randomly use
> > is_in tags on low level items such as roads and churches and let the
> > computer work out a boundary around them.  I should be able to report
> > back in February.
>
> sorry mike, i'm sure you've put a lot of work in, but that sounds even
> more backwards, and very difficult to control well - i foresee a lot
> of fudging to make it work in a lot of areas.
>
> the boundary data should be relatively easy to come by, and require a
> *lot* less points to be drawn/edited, than your method. plus, your
> method is never going to be one hundred percent perfect. for example,
> what happens in areas of open country side, with no POIs to mark, when
> the boundary changes direction - something that will happen a lot?
> and what when a place is in two administrative boundaries? there are
> fairly major cities that straddle for instance state lines in the US.
> i think arkansas may be one?
>
> but i guess itches should be scratchedsomething will doubtless
> come from this, whether unintended or not. ok, it'll be interesting to
> see your results
>

Having multiple ways of achieving the same (or similar) results is not a bad
thing.  Each will have it's own strengths an weaknesses.

80n




>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Andy Allan]

On Jan 9, 2008 8:44 PM, Robin Paulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> can someone explain a few things about the way boundaries work, and
> their relation to the is_in key?
>
> as far as i can tell, when a location (say the suburb of balham, in
> london) is added to the map, the is_in tag needs to be set, multiple
> times. in this case, it would be set as follows:
>
> is_in:Westminster (...i think)
> is_in:greater london
> is_in:england
> is_in:united_kingdom
> is_in:British_Isles
> is_in:Great_Britain
> is_in:Europe
> ...etc.
>
> which seems counter-intuitive, not to mention requiring huge amounts
> of work. do we set this for every item - roads, churches,
> supermarkets,thousands of other items?
> is there anything underway to enable OSM to calculate where an object
> is, based upon knowledge of administrative boundaries - after all,
> they are only a polygon-shaped bounding box?

I think it's worth remembering the history of all of this, since it
will help explain things. The is_in tag predates the ideas of having
wide-spread administrative boundaries (something which I've only seen
happening in the UK over the last 5 months or so) and certainly
predates relations by a long way.

They are probably still useful for some cases, but as you can see
other mechanisms for specifying hierarchy and relations may be more
appropriate nowadays.

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Robin Paulson]

On 10/01/2008, Michael Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >which seems counter-intuitive, not to mention requiring huge amounts
> >of work. do we set this for every item - roads, churches,
> >supermarkets,thousands of other items?
> >is there anything underway to enable OSM to calculate where an object
> >is, based upon knowledge of administrative boundaries - after all,
> >they are only a polygon-shaped bounding box?
>
> Yes, sort of.  But the other way around, I am working on deriving
> administrative boundaries from "is_in" and "place" tags. *If* it
> works, the answer to your main question would be to randomly use
> is_in tags on low level items such as roads and churches and let the
> computer work out a boundary around them.  I should be able to report
> back in February.

sorry mike, i'm sure you've put a lot of work in, but that sounds even
more backwards, and very difficult to control well - i foresee a lot
of fudging to make it work in a lot of areas.

the boundary data should be relatively easy to come by, and require a
*lot* less points to be drawn/edited, than your method. plus, your
method is never going to be one hundred percent perfect. for example,
what happens in areas of open country side, with no POIs to mark, when
the boundary changes direction - something that will happen a lot?
and what when a place is in two administrative boundaries? there are
fairly major cities that straddle for instance state lines in the US.
i think arkansas may be one?

but i guess itches should be scratchedsomething will doubtless
come from this, whether unintended or not. ok, it'll be interesting to
see your results

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Michael Collinson]

At 09:44 PM 1/9/2008, Robin Paulson wrote:
>can someone explain a few things about the way boundaries work, and
>their relation to the is_in key?
>
>as far as i can tell, when a location (say the suburb of balham, in
>london) is added to the map, the is_in tag needs to be set, multiple
>times. in this case, it would be set as follows:
>
>is_in:Westminster (...i think)
>is_in:greater london
>is_in:england
>is_in:united_kingdom
>is_in:British_Isles
>is_in:Great_Britain
>is_in:Europe
>...etc.
>
>which seems counter-intuitive, not to mention requiring huge amounts
>of work. do we set this for every item - roads, churches,
>supermarkets,thousands of other items?
>is there anything underway to enable OSM to calculate where an object
>is, based upon knowledge of administrative boundaries - after all,
>they are only a polygon-shaped bounding box?

Yes, sort of.  But the other way around, I am working on deriving 
administrative boundaries from "is_in" and "place" tags. *If* it 
works, the answer to your main question would be to randomly use 
is_in tags on low level items such as roads and churches and let the 
computer work out a boundary around them.  I should be able to report 
back in February.

I've spent a year seeding OSM with "is_in" and "place"  tags as 
described below.  I've also generated some simple bounding boxes for 
countries from the US government GNS place names data and am working 
on the same for their ADM1 level (states and provinces).  What I am 
working on now is matching the two tags together.  In your above 
example, I'd have entered Balham something like this:

name=Balham
place=suburb
is_in=England,Greater London

Then programmatically I'm looking for closest higher level place tags 
with the name "England" and "Greater London".  That should determine 
that what they are.  Hopefully, the England node will also have 
information saying it is inside the United Kingdom and Europe so the 
process can be repeated.  So in the best case I end up with all the 
values in your example.  I also have lat/lon that I know lies inside 
all of them ... if I also have a lat/lon for Moscow and also know 
that it is Europe, I can begin to build up a model describing the 
size and extent of Europe.

That is the theory.  In practice, there are many issues to contend 
with. What if there is a nearby town called England? , spelling 
variancy, how does Greater London relate to Westminister and are they 
place tagged? etc, etc.  I'm reasonably confident though.  Random use 
of namespaced tags like is_in:country=Sweden will also help.

How I do is_in tagging:

countries, states, counties, cities

- always have a place tag and put as much info in the is_in tag as 
possible.  Use is_in:state etc.

towns, villages, hamlets

- always use a place tag and put at least the country and 
state/county into the is_in tag if known for certain.

suburbs

- always use a place tag and put the just the city/town/kommun of 
which it is a suburb

streets and POIs (churches, supermarkets ...)

- RANDOMLY use is_in tags. Add a postal_code tag if possible.  The 
idea being to generate a good spread of points so that the computer 
can draw a polygon around the outermost points and say that is a 
reasonable approximation of the boundary of a town or suburb.


Mike
Stockholm




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Abigail Brady]

On Jan 9, 2008 11:50 PM, Karl Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I understand why numbers are used instead of names. My question is why are
> there no odd numbers listed? It just looked strange.
>

Future-proofing.  It leaves gaps so that if new units are invented that fit
between existing ones you can make them be '3' or '5', etc, without having
to renumber everything else.

-- 
Abi
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Karl Newman]

On Jan 9, 2008 3:34 PM, Thomas Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Jan 9, 2008 10:58 PM, Karl Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You could query it for admin_level=4 to get the state or
> > province name, to take an example from the "boundary" key page on the
> Wiki.
> > (Does anyone know why there are only even numbers for the admin_level
> > values???)
>
> I believe its so it would fit all possible international region schemes.
> It also fixes the issue for different levels of regions being called
> the same thing, eg counties in the UK and US.
>

I understand why numbers are used instead of names. My question is why are
there no odd numbers listed? It just looked strange.

Karl
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Thomas Wood]

On Jan 9, 2008 10:58 PM, Karl Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You could query it for admin_level=4 to get the state or
> province name, to take an example from the "boundary" key page on the Wiki.
> (Does anyone know why there are only even numbers for the admin_level
> values???)

I believe its so it would fit all possible international region schemes.
It also fixes the issue for different levels of regions being called
the same thing, eg counties in the UK and US.


-- 
Regards,
Thomas Wood
(Edgemaster)

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Karl Newman]

On Jan 9, 2008 12:44 PM, Robin Paulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> can someone explain a few things about the way boundaries work, and
> their relation to the is_in key?
>
> as far as i can tell, when a location (say the suburb of balham, in
> london) is added to the map, the is_in tag needs to be set, multiple
> times. in this case, it would be set as follows:
>
> is_in:Westminster (...i think)
> is_in:greater london
> is_in:england
> is_in:united_kingdom
> is_in:British_Isles
> is_in:Great_Britain
> is_in:Europe
> ...etc.
>
> which seems counter-intuitive, not to mention requiring huge amounts
> of work. do we set this for every item - roads, churches,
> supermarkets,thousands of other items?
> is there anything underway to enable OSM to calculate where an object
> is, based upon knowledge of administrative boundaries - after all,
> they are only a polygon-shaped bounding box?
>
> if i set is_in of balham to london, and the is_in of london to
> england, does osm know that balham is therefore in england, by
> cascading the is_in values? and so on, for as many levels as we
> define?
>

I think the is_in tag is mostly useless, for the reasons you've
demonstrated. I've been thinking about this problem, too. In order to make
properly indexed streets (for find by address) and POIs for GPS devices (I'm
thinking Garmin here specifically), each point or street needs to be
associated with a region (i.e., state or province or maybe country), city,
zip code, etc. But this doesn't need to be tagged on each point--it should
be able to be derived from boundaries. I'm thinking of a program which uses
the administrative boundaries already in the planet file to do an optimized
lookup for points. You could query it for admin_level=4 to get the state or
province name, to take an example from the "boundary" key page on the Wiki.
(Does anyone know why there are only even numbers for the admin_level
values???)

This is basically reverse geocoding, and I know some work has been done on
it in other projects in the past. Maybe PostGIS would be good for this (I
don't know much about PostGIS, but it seems to be the sort of thing for
which it was created).

Karl
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Martin Trautmann]

Robin Paulson wrote:
> can someone explain a few things about the way boundaries work, and
> their relation to the is_in key?
> 
> as far as i can tell, when a location (say the suburb of balham, in
> london) is added to the map, the is_in tag needs to be set, multiple
> times. in this case, it would be set as follows:
> 
> is_in:Westminster (...i think)
> is_in:greater london
> is_in:england
> is_in:united_kingdom
> is_in:British_Isles
> is_in:Great_Britain
> is_in:Europe
> ...etc.
> 
> which seems counter-intuitive, not to mention requiring huge amounts
> of work. do we set this for every item - roads, churches,
> supermarkets,thousands of other items?

For central Europe there's another project, named opengeodb, which is 
structured hierarchically. Here it's enough to take the lowest matching 
level (by loc_id), while all other levels above can be heritated.

The names which are used for is_in have no need to be unique. Thus you 
can not derive info.

- Martin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk