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 <benlae...@gmail.com> 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 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 for Rijmenam/Bonheiden. There aren't many > > 'fusiegemeentes' being mapped -unfortunately- although it would be > > highly interesting to have them, not only from a nominatim (search) > > point of view, but also for addressing in general. > > > > The change I made will probably trigger some changes in the nominatim > > search result in a few days , I now expect that Leuven will be replaced > > by Rotselaar in the search result set when looking up Werchter in a few > > days. > > 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, it > updates a > few minutes after uploading your edits. > > 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
