Re: [Talk-in] Indian Districts

[Arun Ganesh]

>From what I remember, when Harshad imported the districts many years back
there was a problem with multipart districts. This caused quite a few
missing coastal districts. Nothing was deleted.

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 2:14 AM, muzirian  wrote:

> Also wasn't districts boundaries some imports?
> I have noticed problems with districts in Kerala, they still need much
> correction.
>
> Regards,
> Kelvin
>
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Naveen Francis 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> How we make sure that all districts are mapped ?
>> Is district boundaries are getting deleted ?
>> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/o8d
>>
>> Few districts in MH and GJ are missing
>>
>> Thanks,
>> naveenpf
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Indian Districts

[muzirian]

Also wasn't districts boundaries some imports?
I have noticed problems with districts in Kerala, they still need much
correction.

Regards,
Kelvin

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Naveen Francis  wrote:

> Hi
>
> How we make sure that all districts are mapped ?
> Is district boundaries are getting deleted ?
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/o8d
>
> Few districts in MH and GJ are missing
>
> Thanks,
> naveenpf
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

[Talk-in] Indian Districts

[Naveen Francis]

Hi

How we make sure that all districts are mapped ?
Is district boundaries are getting deleted ?
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/o8d

Few districts in MH and GJ are missing

Thanks,
naveenpf
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Indian districts tagging

[Yogesh K S]

1. place=district makes sense. We should change this.
Great, have updated the wiki - 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_India/Boundaries#Administrative_divisions 
and will change the values from county to district.
2. Looking at 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative it 
seems like admin_level=6 is a popular choice for a district level unit 
in the other big countries, larger than India. Its a good idea to use 
6 for consistency. And it allows use to use the 5 slot for the zonal 
councils.
Right, admin_level=6 seems better for districts than 5. But how do we 
take care of districts that are already tagged with 5? As most of the 
districts have already been tagged 5 - 
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.in/keys/admin_level#values, should we mass 
replace them with 6 if the consensus is in favor of this here?


And also values like A & A1 are used in combination with railway=station 
tag - http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/eWQ. Don't know what do these values 
indicate in an administration boundary and relate to railway stations.



thanks,
yogi



On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Yogesh K S > wrote:


Currently I see that we have tagged most of the Indian
districts(more than 300) with place=county[1] but this tag is
mainly used on nodes rather than on administrative boundaries ways
that are tagged with boundary=administrative.[2] But we have added
administrative boundaries for all districts in India[3] and
haven't tagged with place tags. And also we have used
admin_level=5 for all district boundaries but the wiki shows
admin_level=6 for district boundaries.[4]

Request the community to comment or provide suggestions on -

1. Whether to use place=district instead of place=county since
we refer them as districts on the ground in India.[2]
2. Whether to update the India wiki page to avoid confusion on
using admin_level=5 for districts considering we haven't added
revenue division boundaries[4].


[1]taginfo.openstreetmap.in/tags/place=county


[2]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place#Administratively_declared_places
[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_districts_in_India

[4]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_India/Boundaries#Administrative_divisions


cheers,
yogi

___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in




--
Arun Ganesh
(planemad) 


___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in


___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Indian districts tagging

[Arun Ganesh]

1. place=district makes sense. We should change this.

2. Looking at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative it seems
like admin_level=6 is a popular choice for a district level unit in the
other big countries, larger than India. Its a good idea to use 6 for
consistency. And it allows use to use the 5 slot for the zonal councils.




On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Yogesh K S  wrote:

> Currently I see that we have tagged most of the Indian districts(more than
> 300) with place=county[1] but this tag is mainly used on nodes rather than
> on administrative boundaries ways that are tagged with
> boundary=administrative.[2] But we have added administrative boundaries for
> all districts in India[3] and haven't tagged with place tags. And also we
> have used admin_level=5 for all district boundaries but the wiki shows
> admin_level=6 for district boundaries.[4]
>
> Request the community to comment or provide suggestions on -
>
> 1. Whether to use place=district instead of place=county since we
> refer them as districts on the ground in India.[2]
> 2. Whether to update the India wiki page to avoid confusion on using
> admin_level=5 for districts considering we haven't added revenue division
> boundaries[4].
>
>
> [1]taginfo.openstreetmap.in/tags/place=county
> [2]
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place#Administratively_declared_places
> [3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_districts_in_India
> [4]
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_India/Boundaries#Administrative_divisions
>
>
> cheers,
> yogi
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>



-- 
Arun Ganesh
(planemad) 

___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

[Talk-in] Indian districts tagging

[Yogesh K S]

Currently I see that we have tagged most of the Indian districts(more 
than 300) with place=county[1] but this tag is mainly used on nodes 
rather than on administrative boundaries ways that are tagged with 
boundary=administrative.[2] But we have added administrative boundaries 
for all districts in India[3] and haven't tagged with place tags. And 
also we have used admin_level=5 for all district boundaries but the wiki 
shows admin_level=6 for district boundaries.[4]


Request the community to comment or provide suggestions on -

1. Whether to use place=district instead of place=county since we 
refer them as districts on the ground in India.[2]
2. Whether to update the India wiki page to avoid confusion on 
using admin_level=5 for districts considering we haven't added revenue 
division boundaries[4].



[1]taginfo.openstreetmap.in/tags/place=county
[2]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place#Administratively_declared_places
[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_districts_in_India
[4]http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_India/Boundaries#Administrative_divisions


cheers,
yogi

___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in