Re: [OSM-talk-be] Arrondissement Verviers boundary

[A.Pirard.Papou]

On 2012-11-08 16:34, Sander Deryckere wrote : Does everyone agree with this? OK, I trust you, but read below On 2012-11-11 12:36, Ben Laenen wrote : On Sunday 11 November 2012 01:39:57 A.Pirard.Papou wrote: On 2012-11-08 16:46, Ben Laenen wrote : On Thursday 08 November 2012 16:34:23 Sander Deryckere wrote: Hi, I'm trying to organise the boundaries a bit, there's not a lot of work on it, so it's basically checking if there are no problems. There is a problem I have found with Verviers though. If you look at the relation (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1407211) you see that as subareas, the Arondissement of Verviers has a French speaking part, and the German community. That French speaking part get's a strange boundary type (boundary=administrative_fraction), combined with an admin_level=7 tag and the German speaking part has a boundary=political tag. German Community should be a boundary=administrative + admin_level=5 Who keeps changing it to a boundary=political on the wiki anyway? As administrative boundaries should be nested nicely, I propose to delete the boundary 2436189, and to use the municipalities of the Arrondissement of Verviers as subareas. Just as with any other arrondissement. Does everyone agree with this? Boundaries don't need to be nested. In our country it's impossible to do so anyway. What do you mean? That there should be a single relation called Belgium or that all ways should be at level 8? I mean that (for example) there's really no problem if two enitities of the same admin_level overlap a certain area (so that area belongs two both entities). E.g. Brussels belonging to both Flemish and French Community. Or if an entity with admin_level=8 doesn't sit nicely inside an entity with admin_level=6. E.g. German speaking community being part of the Liege province. Or French community not spanning the entire Liege province. Ben So, it's about correct nesting and overlapping... I think that programs doing checks could finger-point at overlapping areas (within a relation) and that they could suddenly start recursing to find overlapping subareas without warning. Belgian (boundary=) administrative areas are 2+1 regions, in which provinces, in which arrondissements, in which municipalities According to the present map: Relation: Belgium (52411)     boundary = administrative Relation Flanders (53134) as subarea Relation Brussels-Capital Region (54094) as subarea Relation Wallonia (90348) as subarea Relation Flemish Community (53136) as subarea Relation French Community (78967) as subarea Relation German-speaking Community (2425209) as subarea As the territory is fully covered by the administrative entities I mention above, there is no room  for more "Belgium" administrative areas than what is in black in this relation.  If you add more, you can't avoid overlapping. According to the definition from the horse's mouth :  "La Communauté française exerce ses compétences dans les provinces wallonnes (à l'exception des communes germanophones) et à Bruxelles." Is "la communauté française"  a territory or a government? It's less than clear, but is anything clear in that field? I think we have these options: remove all XXX-C-s areas altogether (Like Google does ;-) ) (1) consider that the XXX-C-s are not in the administrative tree named Belgium but that they are in a different administrative tree e.g. "Linguistic communities" remove the XXX-C-s relations from any tree, make one per language, allowing overlap and, if we are that kind, more languages in a cultural style (2) May language borderlines (ways) share region borderlines if they are not nested? In principle not, because, according to the theoreticians,  those ways are supposed to be related to just one area (on each side) from which they pick the boundary information. The ideal method to is to make multilinestrings (3) that nest another border just like an arrondissement border would nest municipality borders. But present software does not support way nesting (except hiking.waymarkedtrails.org I was told). When will we push that wagon to unleash many projects? Cheers, André. (1) that avoids to send us back to mapping at each political change like the Sphinx merchants :-) (2) A language tree commands to speak a given and single language. Disjoint areas allow the people to speak different languages openly like the "german-speaking" who are in fact very kind and calm people speaking also French, or the very real Italian community of Grivegnée who have their own church service in Italian (because they don't understand Latin ;-)) (3) I would have called them simply routes (super-routes).

_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be