I don't know if it's helpful in this particular case, but there is a diagram of the hierarchy of the Census geography here:
http://www.census.gov/geo/reference/hierarchy.html -- SEJ -- twitter: @geomantic -- skype: sejohnson8 "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." -- Einstein On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Paul Norman <penor...@mac.com> wrote: > > From: Greg Troxel [mailto:g...@ir.bbn.com] > > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 4:48 AM > > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Alaska CPD boundaries > > > > > > The census bureau divided the unorganized borough into 11 census > > areas. > > These have no legal significance but serve to sub-divided the state > > into > > convenient parts. In spite of this they are in many ways like > > counties. I've > > tagged them the same as counties (admin_level=6) but I'm not convinced > > that > > this is the best tagging. > > > > If they're just a census division, it seems wrong to call them boroughs > > (treating them like counties with a different name). Boroughs as > > counties seem right - it's the way the state divides things less than a > > state and more than a town. The point of admin_level is government, and > > census boundaries (for the sole convenience of the census bureau, > > presumably) are not in any way governments. > > I must admit I've flipped back and forth on my views on this. I initially > wasn't sure if they should be in but I've convinced myself that they should > be and admin_level=6 is probably the best. > > In neither case are we tagging boroughs or CPDs as counties as counties. > We're tagging them as admin_level=6 which is what counties in the other 49 > states are tagged as. admin_level=6 isn't automatically associated with > counties. > > boundary=administrative is for administrative boundaries, not just > government boundaries. Normally the government boundaries are the most > meaningful ones but here there are no government boundaries. From a data > consumer's perspective I think any analysis done is likely to treat the > CPDs > as equivalent to the boroughs. They have their own FIPS codes too. > > Now, if someone local were to come and say "the CPDs are meaningless and > irrelevant" or "I say I'm from a CPD the same way someone would say they're > from a borough" I'd be happy and we'd have a good answer but I don't > believe > anyone who's commented on the list is a local. > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us