I was watching the quiz show Holding out for a Hero last night on
TV and one of the questions was how many cities are in the UK. The
correct answer out of 26, 46 and 66 was 66. Sorry for the spoiler if
anyone had recorded it to watch later and couldn't have guessed.
However I idly wondered at the
@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] UK cities
I was watching the quiz show Holding out for a Hero last night on TV and
one of the questions was how many cities are in the UK. The correct answer
out of 26, 46 and 66 was 66. Sorry for the spoiler if anyone had recorded
it to
watch later and couldn't have
Since city status is such an emotive subject in the UK and I believe there's
some kind of competition to choose another couple of cities to be created
this year, I think we should stick with the officially designate dlist
Regards
Brian
On 17 October 2011 10:48, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Why are we missing St David's? Although it has a cathedral, it's not a
city. It's widely regarded as one, but it's not on the official list.
Simon
On 17 October 2011 10:48, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
I was watching the quiz show Holding out for a Hero last night on
TV and one of the
On 17/10/11 11:12, Simon Blake wrote:
Why are we missing St David's? Although it has a cathedral, it's not a
city. It's widely regarded as one, but it's not on the official list.
It is on the list referenced under Welsh cities. Apparently it was
given its city status in 1995 by Royal Charter.
I don't think the tagging of place=city has ever reflected official city status.
You could change it, but that would be a departure from existing practice.
I doubt most people would expect to see 'London' and 'Westminster' as
equally-sized cities within a few miles of each other. The existing
Ed Loach ed@... writes:
There is a serious problem with that, in that ‘place=city population=5000’ is
an “oh no it isn’t” tag in the same way that ‘railway=station disused=yes’ is.
--
Andrew
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
On 17 October 2011 11:59, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
I would suggest leaving place=city as the common everyday meaning of city,
even
though that is not strictly defined, and to introduce a new tag for the
legal
designation if that is felt to be useful.
I agree with this, it allows
Andrew:
There is a serious problem with that, in that ‘place=city
population=5000’ is
an “oh no it isn’t” tag in the same way that ‘railway=station
disused=yes’ is.
Except the first example would cause a place=city node to render as a city
whatever the population (depending on your
Another way of looking at this is that it comes from tagging a 'place
node' rather than mapping cities as areas. Individual nodes for
counties have been phased out in favour of exact boundaries and the
same could happen for towns and cities. If you map an area, that
forces the choice of whether
Ed Loach ed@... writes:
Someone in this thread suggested using another tag. I forget the suggestion but
along the lines of designation=city or official=city or something. I briefly
thought that this was a good solution, but after further consideration realised
we would probably need to always add
On 17/10/11 14:26, Ed Avis wrote:
Another way of looking at this is that it comes from tagging a 'place
node' rather than mapping cities as areas. Individual nodes for
counties have been phased out in favour of exact boundaries and the
same could happen for towns and cities. If you map an
Tom Hughes tom@... writes:
If you map an area, that
forces the choice of whether your object is intended to represent the
City of London, or Greater London, or whatever.
The problem with that approach is that concepts like town and city
do not have well defined boundaries in the UK.
Implicit in
On 17/10/11 14:26, Ed Avis wrote:
So in the long term the answer may be to stop rendering and address
lookup and other applications from using the place=city nodes at all,
but have them work based on areas. Then the ambiguous place nodes can
eventually disappear.
The main problem with this
Borbus borbus@... writes:
I think a better solution would be to tag some place as being the city
centre and then the renderer can be told: place the name somewhere
within the area of the city, but try to place it close to the city centre.
Yes, in general an area-with-centroid would be a useful
Ed Avis wrote:
So in the long term the answer may be to stop rendering and
address
lookup and other applications from using the place=city nodes at
all,
but have them work based on areas. Then the ambiguous place
nodes can
eventually disappear.
Ah! This reminded me about a recent change
On 17/10/2011 14:44, Ed Avis wrote:
AFAIK, every city has a defined boundary, even if nowadays it is no
longer marked by a city wall. For 'town' this is not so, and you could
not take a strict approach there.
It may be possible in many cases if you take a historical approach.
Some time in
17 matches
Mail list logo
