On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 07:02:01PM +0200, Glenn Plas wrote:
> Kurt (a.o),
>
> I checked the Rotselaar/Werchter setup and I made a single change to
> the Rotselaar relation:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/214462
>
> The only thing I think was missing is adding the Werchter bound
On Sunday 16 June 2013 19:14:16 Glenn Plas wrote:
> That's the theory indeed minute diffs, I know all about them... but
> there is serious lag sometimes for nominatim, they have a nice lag graph
> somewhere.
> I love to be on the safe side when making claims I have no influence over
> :)
The
On 06/16/2013 07:14 PM, Daan Bellefroid wrote:
Oops sorry was looking at Rotselaar
Everything OK ;-
No problem, made me double-double the check, it's always possible I made
a mistake clicking back and forth and using copy/paste ninja techniques ;-)
I feel like we should add all of th
Oops sorry was looking at Rotselaar
Everything OK ;-
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Daan Bellefroid wrote:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/214462
>
> There it is 8? Maybe I'm overlooking something
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Daan Bellefroid wrote:
>
>>
Don't think it'll make nominatim process it differently; it gets it input from
the admin_level and adds each different admin_level to the list it shows (9 =
Werchter, 8 = Rotselaar, 7 = Leuven, 6 = Vlaams Brabant, 4 = Flanders, 2 =
Belgium. Btw, you don't have to wait a few days for it to update
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/214462
There it is 8? Maybe I'm overlooking something
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Daan Bellefroid wrote:
> But in the change, Werchter is given admin_level 8. I think it has to be
> changed.
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Ben Laenen
But in the change, Werchter is given admin_level 8. I think it has to be
changed.
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Ben Laenen wrote:
> On Sunday 16 June 2013 19:02:01 Glenn Plas wrote:
> > Kurt (a.o),
> >
> > I checked the Rotselaar/Werchter setup and I made a single change to the
> > Rotselaar
On 06/16/2013 07:07 PM, Daan Bellefroid wrote:
I think that Werchter should have admin_level 9 (and not 8) as a
deelgemeente
Rotselaar is 8
And Leuven is 7. Leuven with 7 is not the city of Leuven, it is the
Arrondissement Leuven.Vlaams Brabant has 2 arrondissementen: Leuven
and Halle-Vilvoord
On Sunday 16 June 2013 19:02:01 Glenn Plas wrote:
> Kurt (a.o),
>
> I checked the Rotselaar/Werchter setup and I made a single change to the
> Rotselaar relation:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/214462
>
> The only thing I think was missing is adding the Werchter boundary
> rela
I think that Werchter should have admin_level 9 (and not 8) as a
deelgemeente
Rotselaar is 8
And Leuven is 7. Leuven with 7 is not the city of Leuven, it is the
Arrondissement Leuven.Vlaams Brabant has 2 arrondissementen: Leuven and
Halle-Vilvoorde
Therefore Vlaams Brabant has admin_level 6.
On S
Kurt (a.o),
I checked the Rotselaar/Werchter setup and I made a single change to the
Rotselaar relation:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/214462
The only thing I think was missing is adding the Werchter boundary
relation as a 'subarea' to the Rotselaar one.
Did the same setup f
Hi everybody,
i've made a few corrections on the osm files,
so please grab the new files at the same place :
http://osm.bmaron.net/urbis/
Changelog :
- Add missing relation
- Fix some addresses not in relations
- Add type to multipolygons and building=yes
___
12 matches
Mail list logo
