Re: [Talk-GB] Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels
2009/6/13 Peter Miller : > > On 13 Jun 2009, at 09:30, Peter Childs wrote: > > 2009/6/11 Ed Loach : > > And here is the current OSM guidance:- > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level > > In order to tie in with NUTS and with guidance for other > > countries > > within OSM we might want to do the following for England > > (Scotland > > and Wales would be similar but would skip some levels):- > > UK (admin_level=2) > > England/Wales/Scotland (admin_level=4) > > English regions (North East, East of England etc) (also > > admin_level=4 > > as per NUTS) > > Ceremonial counties - where they exist (admin_level= 5) > > County Councils/Unitary Authorities (admin-level=6) > > Districts (admin-level=8) districts / London boroughs / > > metropolitan > > boroughs. > > > Whats the simplest way of adding a boundary? I notice that Medway does > not have one, I know ruthley where it should be, but have no idea of > how to go about adding the relevant relation/way. I'm fine adding > Roads and smaller stuff but the boundary stuff just throws me. > > It is better to use a relation for the boundary rather than way tags which > used to be the only way to do it. Add the appropriate existing ways > (rivers/roads etc) to a new relation. You may need to split roads/rivers > where the boundary diverges. For some sections of the boundary you will need > to add new ways (where it goes across fields). I just add a > 'note=administrative boundary' tag to those ways. > The only source of data we can legally use for the boundary to by knowledge > is the NPE maps base which shows boundaries as a dotted line if you are > lucky and if they have not moved in the past 50 years. I also check > wikipedia as a cross check Given that Medway is less than 50 years old that could be a problem. > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EnglandMedway.png) and then the official > council website to see if there is general agreement on the shape and > extent. > It isn't perfect - to be perfect our democratic government will need to > persuade the OS to give its citizens the boundaries by which it is governed. > Until now lets do the best we can and when people say they are wrong we will > ask them to provide the information to correct it! > Btw, OSM and the UK Boundaries project got a mention on the Guardians data > blog yesterday. > http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/jun/11/opensourc > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tank=yes?
2009/6/12 Ed Loach : >> I'd suggest hazard=tanks (plural). > > I've not seen signs warning about tanks, but did have to give way to > one at a t-junction once on the road from Wolverhampton to Cosford > (as I joined it on the road from Shifnal). You could feel the road > (and car) vibrating long before you knew what was causing it... > > Ed > > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > A352 between Wool and Wareham, has a Hazard Sign for Tanks, it also has a 40 mile an hour speed limit for Cars and 20mph for "Tracked Vehicles" ie Tanks. Forgot to check where exactly it started and finished however while I was driving on Holiday. Peter. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels
2009/6/13 Peter Miller : > > On 13 Jun 2009, at 09:30, Peter Childs wrote: > > 2009/6/11 Ed Loach : > > And here is the current OSM guidance:- > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level > > In order to tie in with NUTS and with guidance for other > > countries > > within OSM we might want to do the following for England > > (Scotland > > and Wales would be similar but would skip some levels):- > > UK (admin_level=2) > > England/Wales/Scotland (admin_level=4) > > English regions (North East, East of England etc) (also > > admin_level=4 > > as per NUTS) > > Ceremonial counties - where they exist (admin_level= 5) > > County Councils/Unitary Authorities (admin-level=6) > > Districts (admin-level=8) districts / London boroughs / > > metropolitan > > boroughs. > > > Whats the simplest way of adding a boundary? I notice that Medway does > not have one, I know ruthley where it should be, but have no idea of > how to go about adding the relevant relation/way. I'm fine adding > Roads and smaller stuff but the boundary stuff just throws me. > > It is better to use a relation for the boundary rather than way tags which > used to be the only way to do it. Add the appropriate existing ways > (rivers/roads etc) to a new relation. You may need to split roads/rivers > where the boundary diverges. For some sections of the boundary you will need > to add new ways (where it goes across fields). I just add a > 'note=administrative boundary' tag to those ways. > The only source of data we can legally use for the boundary to by knowledge > is the NPE maps base which shows boundaries as a dotted line if you are > lucky and if they have not moved in the past 50 years. I also check > wikipedia as a cross check > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EnglandMedway.png) and then the official > council website to see if there is general agreement on the shape and > extent. > It isn't perfect - to be perfect our democratic government will need to > persuade the OS to give its citizens the boundaries by which it is governed. > Until now lets do the best we can and when people say they are wrong we will > ask them to provide the information to correct it! > Btw, OSM and the UK Boundaries project got a mention on the Guardians data > blog yesterday. > http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/jun/11/opensourc > > > > Regards, > > Peter > > > > Peter. I think there is value in also tagging the way with at least boundary=administrative, especially ways that would otherwise only have the relation. The relation model does not completely surpass the old tagging scheme. -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels
On 13 Jun 2009, at 09:30, Peter Childs wrote: 2009/6/11 Ed Loach : And here is the current OSM guidance:- http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level In order to tie in with NUTS and with guidance for other countries within OSM we might want to do the following for England (Scotland and Wales would be similar but would skip some levels):- UK (admin_level=2) England/Wales/Scotland (admin_level=4) English regions (North East, East of England etc) (also admin_level=4 as per NUTS) Ceremonial counties - where they exist (admin_level= 5) County Councils/Unitary Authorities (admin-level=6) Districts (admin-level=8) districts / London boroughs / metropolitan boroughs. Whats the simplest way of adding a boundary? I notice that Medway does not have one, I know ruthley where it should be, but have no idea of how to go about adding the relevant relation/way. I'm fine adding Roads and smaller stuff but the boundary stuff just throws me. It is better to use a relation for the boundary rather than way tags which used to be the only way to do it. Add the appropriate existing ways (rivers/roads etc) to a new relation. You may need to split roads/ rivers where the boundary diverges. For some sections of the boundary you will need to add new ways (where it goes across fields). I just add a 'note=administrative boundary' tag to those ways. The only source of data we can legally use for the boundary to by knowledge is the NPE maps base which shows boundaries as a dotted line if you are lucky and if they have not moved in the past 50 years. I also check wikipedia as a cross check (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EnglandMedway.png ) and then the official council website to see if there is general agreement on the shape and extent. It isn't perfect - to be perfect our democratic government will need to persuade the OS to give its citizens the boundaries by which it is governed. Until now lets do the best we can and when people say they are wrong we will ask them to provide the information to correct it! Btw, OSM and the UK Boundaries project got a mention on the Guardians data blog yesterday. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/jun/11/opensourc Regards, Peter Peter. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels
2009/6/11 Ed Loach : >> And here is the current OSM guidance:- >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level >> >> In order to tie in with NUTS and with guidance for other >> countries >> within OSM we might want to do the following for England >> (Scotland >> and Wales would be similar but would skip some levels):- >> >> UK (admin_level=2) >> England/Wales/Scotland (admin_level=4) >> English regions (North East, East of England etc) (also >> admin_level=4 >> as per NUTS) >> Ceremonial counties - where they exist (admin_level= 5) >> County Councils/Unitary Authorities (admin-level=6) >> Districts (admin-level=8) districts / London boroughs / >> metropolitan >> boroughs. > Whats the simplest way of adding a boundary? I notice that Medway does not have one, I know ruthley where it should be, but have no idea of how to go about adding the relevant relation/way. I'm fine adding Roads and smaller stuff but the boundary stuff just throws me. Peter. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
