2012/8/29 Ben Laenen <benlae...@gmail.com> > On Wednesday 29 August 2012 13:54:32 Sander Deryckere wrote: > > I would like to discuss the naming of the arrondissements in Belgium. > > > > (...) > > > > 1. When people refer to "Antwerpen", they might mean the province or > the > > city, but never the arrondissement. > > That's mainly because we never ever talk about arrondissements at all :-) >
It's also why I want to make it clear it's an arrondissement. If people see the name "Brugge" without Arrondissement near it, only few people (or nobody) will think it's the arrondissement you mean. > > > If they mean the arrondissement, > > that's always mentioned. And I believe that the name tag should reflect > > what people use to refer to the object. > > 2. This is also in the choice of the names of Wikipedia articles: They > > name the articles Antwerpen > > (stad)<https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antwerpen_%28stad%29>and > > Antwerpen > > (provincie) <https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antwerpen_%28provincie%29 > >, > > so the appended (stad) or (provincie) is just a clarification. But the > > article of the arrondissement gets the name Arrondissement > > Antwerpen<https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrondissement_Antwerpen>which > > means it's part of the name. > > I wouldn't take every little thing on wikipedia as absolute fact. I wonder > if > they've thought about it themselves. And should it be "Arrondissement" or > what > we usually mean with these: "Bestuurlijk arrondissement". Also, if you > look at > http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antwerpen_%28gerechtelijk_arrondissement%29or at > http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrondissement_Antwerpen -- if they thought > it > was part of the name they'd have to capitalize the word, which they don't. > > If you look at the website of the province of Antwerp: > http://www.provant.be/bestuur/grondgebied/ it says: "Verdeeld in drie > bestuurlijke arrondissementen, Antwerpen, Mechelen en Turnhout" > If it were really part of the name, one would have to repeat > "arrondissement" > each time. > West-Flanders lists them completely: http://www.west-vlaanderen.be/provincie/beleid_bestuur/gemeenten/Pages/default.aspxthe same for Flemish-Brabant http://www.vlaamsbrabant.be/over-de-provincie/kennismaking/grondgebied-kaartmateriaal/gemeenten-vlaams-brabant/index.jsp. I didn't find other provinces listing their arrondissements. > > > > 3. We can't expect non-OSM members to learn the mapping of the > different > > admin_levels. So if someone searches the Kerkstraat in Brugge, and > they > > return with a result of the Kerkstraat in Heist inside Brugge, they > > could wrongly think that they have the right street. While if the result > > would show the Kerkstraat is in Heist, arrondissement Brugge, the user > > might know it's wrong. > > I don't consider this too much of an issue. If you search a place in OSM, > you'll now get the whole list municipality - arrondissement - province - > region - country. > > Isn't it a bit strange if municipality, arrondissement and province all have the same name? I think having something like "Arrondissement" in the name would make it clear at which point in the hierarchy you've arrived. > > > 4. Some people want to index the streets per city (to have a quicker > > search). Because other countries use different admin_levels for their > > city boundaries, the only current way is searching the city node and the > > boundary that goes with it by the name tag. By using the city name for > the > > arrondissements, these tools could get confused. (this last part is > mainly > > the fault of Germany, where different admin_levels are used for different > > importance of cities). This also makes that Nominatim can't automatically > > add "Arrondissement" to make the search result of #3 more clear. > > > > > > Off coarse, setting the name to "Arrondissement Antwerpen" also makes the > > life of the mapper a bit easier (it's easier to browse through the > > different boundary relations), but this is of lesser importance than > having > > the right data. > > For once, I don't think we should consider the mapper too much here: once > these boundaries are mapped, that's it, they shouldn't really be touched > anymore. > That's also why I said it was of lesser importance. > > Ben > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
