Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-06-02 Thread Dave Stubbs
On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Shaun McDonald
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On 1 Jun 2008, at 22:52, Cartinus wrote:

 On Sunday 01 June 2008 17:43:11 Karl Newman wrote:
 The examples that keep being quoted are of 'towns' that straddle
 state
 boundaries in the US

 I don't know any examples of towns straddling state boundaries,
 but towns
 straddling county boundaries are common enough to break the model.

 Here is one example of a city that is part of three counties:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora%2C_Colorado

 The authority of the municipalities is granted by the states, not by
 the
 counties.

 Here's another. Worcester Park sits on the boundary of 3 English
 counties
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.38053lon=-0.24354zoom=15layers=B00FF


How's that relevant?
Is there a Worcester Park administrative area that you know of
straddling the boundaries?

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-06-02 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 11:52 PM, Cartinus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 For another less obvious example closer to Martijn van Oosterhout:
 A Dutch waterschap is an administrative level that resorts directly below
 the national government. Several of them straddle provincial boundaries. In
 the Netherlands this problem is solved on most maps by just ignoring
 the waterschap boundaries, because most people ignore the waterschappen
 anyway. There is however no reason not to put them in the openstreetmap
 database (if we can get the data).

Most people ignore them because they are irrevelent to most people.
They make no laws, have no jurisdiction. In that sense they're more
like postcode boundaries: a fairly arbitrary division of area for the
purposes of optimising some process. Another example would be the area
covered by a power substation or gas distribution node. These are
well-defined areas, but not interesting to people directly.

That isn't to say these boundaries shouldn't be in OSM. It would be
interesting to have the local zones associated with schools in AU, for
example. I'm just not sure admin_level is the right tag for this.

But then, I don't have any other suggestion for tags either. I was
kinda assuming that admin_level would only be for legal administrative
boundaries, not so much any arbitrary boundary.

Have a nice day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://svana.org/kleptog/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-06-02 Thread Cartinus
On Monday 02 June 2008 10:38:59 Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
 Most people ignore them because they are irrevelent to most people.
 They make no laws, have no jurisdiction. In that sense they're more
 like postcode boundaries: a fairly arbitrary division of area for the
 purposes of optimising some process.

The waterschap levies taxes. They do have laws, which if you break them, 
you do get fined. There are elections for the representatives. Legally they 
are part of the Dutch administration.

See e.g.:
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterschap (Dutch)
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bestuursrecht_%28Nederland%29#Bestuursorganen 
(Dutch)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_board_%28The_Netherlands%29 (English)

Just the fact that the waterschap mostly deals with farmers and most Dutch 
people are urbanised and don't realise what the waterschap is and does 
isn't making it less part of the Dutch administration.

 Another example would be the area
 covered by a power substation or gas distribution node. These are
 well-defined areas, but not interesting to people directly.
A powerstation and a gas distribution node are physical things (fenced off 
areas) and not administrative entities, so this comparison is just weird 
IMHO.

 I was
 kinda assuming that admin_level would only be for legal administrative
 boundaries, not so much any arbitrary boundary.
That is what I think too.

-- 
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-06-02 Thread Lester Caine
Dave Stubbs wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Shaun McDonald
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 1 Jun 2008, at 22:52, Cartinus wrote:

 On Sunday 01 June 2008 17:43:11 Karl Newman wrote:
 The examples that keep being quoted are of 'towns' that straddle
 state
 boundaries in the US
 I don't know any examples of towns straddling state boundaries,
 but towns
 straddling county boundaries are common enough to break the model.

 Here is one example of a city that is part of three counties:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora%2C_Colorado

 The authority of the municipalities is granted by the states, not by
 the
 counties.
 Here's another. Worcester Park sits on the boundary of 3 English
 counties
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.38053lon=-0.24354zoom=15layers=B00FF

 
 How's that relevant?
 Is there a Worcester Park administrative area that you know of
 straddling the boundaries?

ACTUALLY it may well be that one authority is responsible for some aspects 
even where the area is in a different county. I pay RATES to Gloucestershire, 
but the Business premises are a Worcestershire postal address. Things are 
simply not black and white when it comes to abstract concepts like boundaries ;)

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-06-02 Thread Thomas Wood
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Lester Caine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Dave Stubbs wrote:
 On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Shaun McDonald
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 1 Jun 2008, at 22:52, Cartinus wrote:

 On Sunday 01 June 2008 17:43:11 Karl Newman wrote:
 The examples that keep being quoted are of 'towns' that straddle
 state
 boundaries in the US
 I don't know any examples of towns straddling state boundaries,
 but towns
 straddling county boundaries are common enough to break the model.

 Here is one example of a city that is part of three counties:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora%2C_Colorado

 The authority of the municipalities is granted by the states, not by
 the
 counties.
 Here's another. Worcester Park sits on the boundary of 3 English
 counties
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.38053lon=-0.24354zoom=15layers=B00FF


 How's that relevant?
 Is there a Worcester Park administrative area that you know of
 straddling the boundaries?

 ACTUALLY it may well be that one authority is responsible for some aspects
 even where the area is in a different county. I pay RATES to Gloucestershire,
 but the Business premises are a Worcestershire postal address. Things are
 simply not black and white when it comes to abstract concepts like boundaries 
 ;)


Yeah, but we can just ignore postal boundaries completely for now,
they're not administrative and don't mesh with the admin boundaries at
all in the UK.
Your example is reasonably common, my postal address and postcode is
Surrey, but I live in the London Borough of Sutton (so pay rates to
London etc).

Please lets not drag non-admin things into this, since it's
complicated enough as it is.

-- 
Regards,
Thomas Wood
(Edgemaster)

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-06-02 Thread Alex Mauer
Cartinus wrote:
 A powerstation and a gas distribution node are physical things (fenced off 
 areas) and not administrative entities, so this comparison is just weird 
 IMHO.

I think Martijn was referring to the areas served by a particular power
station or gas distribution node, not to the stations and nodes
themselves.  Those areas are logical, not physical.

-Alex Mauer hawke


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-06-01 Thread Karl Newman
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 3:49 AM, Lester Caine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
  Do you have an example if such a jurisdictional anomoly? It would seem
  to me that such a servant with two masters would have some rather
  interesting problems.

 The examples that keep being quoted are of 'towns' that straddle state
 boundaries in the US, but other administrative anomalies are wards and
 parishes that do not match the higher level town and county boundaries in
 the
 UK. Some parts of 'Scotland' are classified as 'England' although THAT is
 an
 area where there would probably be local disagreement as to the actual
 state
 of play.

 --
 Lester Caine - G8HFL


The US example that probably gets quoted the most is Kansas City, Kansas and
it's neighbor across the river, Kansas City, Missouri, but those are
distinct cities with their own government, so that's not a valid example.

Karl
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-06-01 Thread Cartinus
On Sunday 01 June 2008 17:43:11 Karl Newman wrote:
  The examples that keep being quoted are of 'towns' that straddle state
  boundaries in the US

I don't know any examples of towns straddling state boundaries, but towns 
straddling county boundaries are common enough to break the model.

Here is one example of a city that is part of three counties:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora%2C_Colorado

The authority of the municipalities is granted by the states, not by the 
counties.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

For another less obvious example closer to Martijn van Oosterhout:
A Dutch waterschap is an administrative level that resorts directly below 
the national government. Several of them straddle provincial boundaries. In 
the Netherlands this problem is solved on most maps by just ignoring 
the waterschap boundaries, because most people ignore the waterschappen 
anyway. There is however no reason not to put them in the openstreetmap 
database (if we can get the data).

-- 
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-31 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:20 PM, Lester Caine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Same applies to any of the country boundaries, do you draw high water line, or
 the international demarcation out on the continental shelf.
 And England and Ireland are part of Europe and the EU so do you include the
 water around them or not.

For country boundaries we draw them where they are. No country's
border is at the high water mark. Consider this image:
http://www.rijkswaterstaat.nl/geotool/
I don't know where the continental shelf is, but I bet it isn't along
any of those borders.

Something like the EU is merely the union of the countries within it.
There are bits of the EU scattered across the globe., I would rather
model that as a relation. Some 60% of the earths surface is
international waters and belongs to no-one. Most of the time the EEZ
is relevent because the continetal shelf varies dramatically in width.

 The 'nesting' rule does not exist. We have already had enough examples of
 where boundaries form different 'sets' of areas so there is no way to insist
 that the 'admin' boundaries are mutually exclusive :(

Do you have an example if such a jurisdictional anomoly? It would seem
to me that such a servant with two masters would have some rather
interesting problems.

Have a nice day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://svana.org/kleptog/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread elvin ibbotson

On 30 May 2008, at 00:19, Dave Stubbs wrote:

This strand of the discussion (below) though echoes the earlier  
thread I
kicked off (but gave up pursuing because there seemed to be more  
prejudice
than logic in the discussion) about the idea of numerically-based  
properties
in the database mapped to human-friendly language in editors and  
viewers.


OMG is your brain mush? This whole nonsense is over what admin_level
(a numerical tagging scheme) maps to. It's the perfect example of why
numbering the bloomin tags doesn't necessarily actually solve
anything. It's also the perfect example of how a global numbering
system is utterly irrelevant given our ability to invent domain and
ordering specific ones on a whim.



Oops! I touched a nerve there :-) I'm no brain surgeon but, from what  
I've seen on telly, most peoples brains are, fundamentally, a bit  
mushy. This fluidity and flexibility is IMHO better than the rigidity  
of an ossified brain. As I understand it the numbers are not the  
problem, it arises from people not knowing which is the right number  
to use (eg. England/Scotland border admin_level 2 or 4?). This is why  
I think numbers are useful in the data but users should not have to  
know what numbers to use. Rather they should be presented with  
choices using words they understand which then put the right numbers  
in the database. As for our ability to invent domain and
ordering specific ones on a whim this too would be better translated  
into English as she is spoke.




Most of that discussion was about highways but similar arguments  
seem to
apply to boundaries. I think most British mappers would be happier  
selecting
from a boundary sub-menu of 'National', 'County', 'District',  
'parish', with
each choice invisibly mapped back to the appropriate numerical  
boundary type
than with the clumsy 'boundary=administrative' 'admin_level=4'  
approach.


Yes, I'm sure they would rather pick from such a menu. Mapping to the
relevant boundary and admin_level tags should be trivial as the wiki
page manages it. I'm sure implementations are welcome.



Exellent! We agree, then :-)

elvin (mushbrain) ibbotson___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Andy Allan
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:37 PM, elvin ibbotson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I think most British mappers would be happier selecting
 from a boundary sub-menu of 'National', 'County', 'District', 'parish',

Yes.

 with
 each choice invisibly mapped back to the appropriate numerical boundary type
 than with the clumsy 'boundary=administrative' 'admin_level=4' approach.

No.

 In
 other countries/languages, other words would map to the same numbers.

Other words *could* be mapped into the same numbers. But since we can
see quite clearly that there are more than 10 types of administrative
boundaries in the world, and different people have different opinions
as to which are equivalent, what advantage is there in trying to
shoe-horn them into such a narrow set? And can anybody, in advance,
name every boundary type in the entire world and get the inter-nation
equivalence correct and uncontroversial? I think not.

I think we should store the actual boundary types, and if a user of
the data (e.g. a renderer) considers that English counties are
equivalent to US states then he can process them into both being the
same numerical value. If he considers English counties and US counties
to be equivalent, he can do so too. So the numerical equivalence table
should be on the rendering end of things, and the database should
store the actual factual data.

Or in short, call a spade a spade, not a gardening implement level 2.

Cheers,
Andy

 But isn't this democratic/anarchic approach to mapping great? I'm going to
 put a national/state level boundary around our village and name it Isle of
 Man, resulting in some worthwhile reductions in taxes and a free grandstand
 seat for the TT races next month :-)
 elvin ibbotson

 From: Shaun McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date: 29 May 2008 13:43:43 BDT
 To: Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands
 On 29 May 2008, at 13:31, Bruce Cowan wrote:

 Seriously, the number system for borders is rather strange, surely there
 must be a more obvious scale. I suppose this has been mentioned before
 though.

 I thought people are using things like district, country, city, town etc for
 the boundaries, rather than a numeric value.


 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Andy Allan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Other words *could* be mapped into the same numbers. But since we can
 see quite clearly that there are more than 10 types of administrative
 boundaries in the world, and different people have different opinions
 as to which are equivalent, what advantage is there in trying to
 shoe-horn them into such a narrow set? And can anybody, in advance,
 name every boundary type in the entire world and get the inter-nation
 equivalence correct and uncontroversial? I think not.

Because 99% of applications don't care the slightest how the internal
subdivisions of some random country in the world compare to those in
england. All renderers care about is is boundary A more or less
important than boundary B. Numbers work perfect for this and that's
why they're used.

There is absolutely no implication that admin_level=4 is the same
everywhere. We know it isn't but we do know it's within a country,
because countries are admin_level=2. Just like highway=tertiary is not
the same everywhere in the world, but customised to the local
situation.

 I think we should store the actual boundary types, and if a user of
 the data (e.g. a renderer) considers that English counties are
 equivalent to US states then he can process them into both being the
 same numerical value. If he considers English counties and US counties
 to be equivalent, he can do so too. So the numerical equivalence table
 should be on the rendering end of things, and the database should
 store the actual factual data.

If you are willing to maintain a mapping table for the 160+ counties
in the world and maintain the megabytes of rendering rules that would
be required to make it render sensebly then we can talk. Until then
let us use admin_level and be done with it.

Have a nice day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://svana.org/kleptog/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Sebastian Spaeth
elvin ibbotson wrote:

 As I understand it the numbers are not the problem, it
 arises from people not knowing which is the right number to use (eg.
 England/Scotland border admin_level 2 or 4?). This is why I think
 numbers are useful in the data but users should not have to know what
 numbers to use. Rather they should be presented with choices using words
 they understand which then put the right numbers in the database.

The problem is not at all about whether you let user choose a number or
from a list of wordings. The issue at hand here is whether Wales country
border is of the same type as Austria's is.

This is what wars are fought over and you cannot solve the issue by
either numbers or by having people select from a list municipal or
country border.


 Yes, I'm sure they would rather pick from such a menu. Mapping to the
 relevant boundary and admin_level tags should be trivial as the wiki
 page manages it. I'm sure implementations are welcome.

The issue is not at all whether there's a nice drop down list or not.
People work already using descriptions on the wiki. However what
constitutes a country border is open to interpretation, apparently.


spaetz

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Andy Allan
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Martijn van Oosterhout
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Because 99% of applications don't care the slightest how the internal
 subdivisions of some random country in the world compare to those in
 england. All renderers care about is is boundary A more or less
 important than boundary B. Numbers work perfect for this and that's
 why they're used.

Yes, for rendering decisions like X =5. That doesn't imply it's the
best approach for storing the data. Don't tag for renderers etc.

 There is absolutely no implication that admin_level=4 is the same
 everywhere. We know it isn't but we do know it's within a country,
 because countries are admin_level=2.

So how can one admin level be globally defined, but another one isn't?
Within a country is a farcial statement, since this entire
conversation has shown there is no global equivalence to the meaning
of the word country. You don't need a passport to travel from Wales
to England, nor from Belgium to Luxembourg, and the United Arab
Emirates adds a whole new level of complexity...

 maintain the megabytes of rendering rules that would
 be required to make it render

You miss the point entirely, I think. Each renderer would choose the
number of boundary types it wants to distinguish between, and would
have a rule for each. So all the different types would be coalesced
before rendering. For example, I made a style last week that took
minor, tertiary and unclassified to be the same thing (for this
particular application) and coalesced them into one rule. And to be
honest, it's not long until I decide to do the same thing for the
million shades of green on the cycle map. And if I was to do the same
with boundaries, I'd merge all the international + constituent country
borders into one style, and lump the rest together too. When it's a
pain to write mapnik filters, I'll fiddle the DB instead, or
preprocess the planet file.

But I don't demand only two admin levels, even if that suits
everything I want from OSM.

And you won't hear me saying that there are only 10 highway types, or
all green spaces should have a common tag. It's up to the renderers to
make the decisions - the database should be as accurate as possible,
not some kind of small minded kludge where someone stood up one day
and said there can only be 10 types of border in OSM. Or do we
accept floating point values?

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Steve Chilton
I am glad I mentioned it!
Certainly stirred up some nationalist and sub-nationalist hornets.
Can I suggest a cease-fire on it.
Also suggest a compromise for now.
I propose adding code to style sheet to show admin_level=3 as a less
dominant variant of admin_level=2 to show at same zooms, so that
countries (=2) and sub-countries (=3) can both show at reasonable
levels.
Activists are then free to bash each other in tag wars (changing tags
between 2 and 3) at will.
Scope for the DB to reflect the nuances (agreed or otherwise!) and the
mapnik layer to show something.

Cheers
STEVE

Steve Chilton, Learning Support Fellow
Learning and Technical Support Unit Manager
School of Health and Social Sciences
Middlesex University
phone/fax: 020 8411 5355
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mdx.ac.uk/schools/hssc/staff/profiles/technical/chiltons.asp

Chair of the Society of Cartographers: http://www.soc.org.uk/

SoC conference 2008:
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/cartographers08/

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sebastian Spaeth
Sent: 30 May 2008 14:17
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

elvin ibbotson wrote:

 As I understand it the numbers are not the problem, it
 arises from people not knowing which is the right number to use (eg.
 England/Scotland border admin_level 2 or 4?). This is why I think
 numbers are useful in the data but users should not have to know what
 numbers to use. Rather they should be presented with choices using
words
 they understand which then put the right numbers in the database.

The problem is not at all about whether you let user choose a number or
from a list of wordings. The issue at hand here is whether Wales country
border is of the same type as Austria's is.

This is what wars are fought over and you cannot solve the issue by
either numbers or by having people select from a list municipal or
country border.


 Yes, I'm sure they would rather pick from such a menu. Mapping to the
 relevant boundary and admin_level tags should be trivial as the wiki
 page manages it. I'm sure implementations are welcome.

The issue is not at all whether there's a nice drop down list or not.
People work already using descriptions on the wiki. However what
constitutes a country border is open to interpretation, apparently.


spaetz

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Dermot McNally
2008/5/30 Steve Chilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Also suggest a compromise for now.

Good call. Steve for President. But of what country?...

I'll get me coat.

Dermot

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread elvin ibbotson


From: Sebastian Spaeth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 30 May 2008 14:16:59 BDT
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands


elvin ibbotson wrote:


As I understand it the numbers are not the problem, it
arises from people not knowing which is the right number to use (eg.
England/Scotland border admin_level 2 or 4?). This is why I think
numbers are useful in the data but users should not have to know what
numbers to use. Rather they should be presented with choices using  
words

they understand which then put the right numbers in the database.


The problem is not at all about whether you let user choose a  
number or
from a list of wordings. The issue at hand here is whether Wales  
country

border is of the same type as Austria's is.


It's true this was the original issue, and (as I have already said) I  
would rank the Welsh and Scottish borders at the same level as US  
states, but my contributions have been about the way the admin_level  
is presented to the user.




This is what wars are fought over and you cannot solve the issue by
either numbers or by having people select from a list municipal or
country border.


Yes, I'm sure they would rather pick from such a menu. Mapping to  
the

relevant boundary and admin_level tags should be trivial as the wiki
page manages it. I'm sure implementations are welcome.


The issue is not at all whether there's a nice drop down list or not.
People work already using descriptions on the wiki.


I for one do not want to have to be flicking backwards and forwards  
between wiki pages looking up the correct tagging convention when I  
am trying to edit the map. I much prefer simply choosing from the  
options Potlatch or JOSM present to me. Unfortunately, all to often,  
you need to consult the wiki and I believe this is likely to put a  
lot of new users off. I was told only a very small proportion of  
people who register as users are actually active in building the map.  
This could be one of the reasons why. The key=value tag approach is  
great for extending OSM into specialist fields or adding metadata but  
the core properties have to be standardised. That is why we have the  
guides on the wiki and arguments over the uses of these tags. I just  
think there could be improvements to the way the core tags are  
handled in the database and editor software, is all :-)


elvin___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Richard Fairhurst
elvin ibbotson wrote:

 I for one do not want to have to be flicking backwards and forwards
 between wiki pages looking up the correct tagging convention when I  am
 trying to edit the map. I much prefer simply choosing from the  options
 Potlatch or JOSM present to me. Unfortunately, all to often,  you need
 to consult the wiki [...]
 I just  think there
 could be improvements to the way the core tags are  handled in the
 database and editor software, is all :-)

Well, one of the big things planned for Potlatch 1.0 is exactly that -  
an (optional) property editing system that abstracts the tags away  
from the novice user. These things don't happen overnight but they  
_do_ happen! :)

cheers
Richard


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Dave Stubbs
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 4:43 PM, elvin ibbotson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 From: Sebastian Spaeth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date: 30 May 2008 14:16:59 BDT
 Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

 elvin ibbotson wrote:

 As I understand it the numbers are not the problem, it
 arises from people not knowing which is the right number to use (eg.
 England/Scotland border admin_level 2 or 4?). This is why I think
 numbers are useful in the data but users should not have to know what
 numbers to use. Rather they should be presented with choices using words
 they understand which then put the right numbers in the database.

 The problem is not at all about whether you let user choose a number or
 from a list of wordings. The issue at hand here is whether Wales country
 border is of the same type as Austria's is.

 It's true this was the original issue, and (as I have already said) I would
 rank the Welsh and Scottish borders at the same level as US states, but my
 contributions have been about the way the admin_level is presented to the
 user.

 This is what wars are fought over and you cannot solve the issue by
 either numbers or by having people select from a list municipal or
 country border.

 Yes, I'm sure they would rather pick from such a menu. Mapping to the
 relevant boundary and admin_level tags should be trivial as the wiki
 page manages it. I'm sure implementations are welcome.

 The issue is not at all whether there's a nice drop down list or not.
 People work already using descriptions on the wiki.

 I for one do not want to have to be flicking backwards and forwards between
 wiki pages looking up the correct tagging convention when I am trying to
 edit the map. I much prefer simply choosing from the options Potlatch or
 JOSM present to me. Unfortunately, all to often, you need to consult the
 wiki and I believe this is likely to put a lot of new users off. I was told
 only a very small proportion of people who register as users are actually
 active in building the map. This could be one of the reasons why. The
 key=value tag approach is great for extending OSM into specialist fields or
 adding metadata but the core properties have to be standardised. That is why
 we have the guides on the wiki and arguments over the uses of these tags. I
 just think there could be improvements to the way the core tags are handled
 in the database and editor software, is all :-)

The only part of this where you are causing controversy is where you
talk about the database. The idea of editors providing better tagging
support is a good one that would be welcomed by many people, and a
fairly standardised core tag set is generally what we currently have
(if a bit crap in places, and not necessarily well supported by the
editors atm).

As for the mappers to users ratio, well, historically it's running at
about 1 in 10. That's based on the rolling month edit stats that the
server produces every day... there are probably more semi-active
mappers who aren't contributing every month.
I don't think that's actually too bad considering. It would be
interesting to see why the other 9/10 people haven't continued, but
we'd probably have to spam them with a survey to find out. I'd
wouldn't be surprised if the learning curve was a big factor.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Lester Caine
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
 On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Andy Allan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Yes, for rendering decisions like X =5. That doesn't imply it's the
 best approach for storing the data. Don't tag for renderers etc.
 
 It's not tagging for renderers. It's tagging for anything that wishes
 to programmatically extract administration-type data from the OSM
 database.

At last someone who is also not bothered how things are rendered :)

Personally I've been viewing admin_level=0 as the world.
admin_level=1 should equal the continents
admin_level=2 for countries ( UNITED KINGDOM )
admin_level=3 ( or so ) for states/areas ( ENGLAND )

Only niggle with this is 'European Union' - does that class as a continent or 
do we add floating point as suggested and have 1.5. Not all countries in 
europe are in the European Union, but EU is certainly an administrative area? 
So perhaps THAT should be level 2 for Europe with countries at level 3.

I don't think that the level structure was eve actually agreed - and now it's 
biting back?

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Alex Mauer
Lester Caine wrote:

 Personally I've been viewing admin_level=0 as the world.
 admin_level=1 should equal the continents
 admin_level=2 for countries ( UNITED KINGDOM )
 admin_level=3 ( or so ) for states/areas ( ENGLAND )

It seems like level 4 is already used as you describe for level 3.

 Only niggle with this is 'European Union' - does that class as a continent or
 do we add floating point as suggested and have 1.5. Not all countries in
 europe are in the European Union, but EU is certainly an administrative area?
 So perhaps THAT should be level 2 for Europe with countries at level 3.

That doesn't fit at all with the use of level 2 described on the wiki...

 I don't think that the level structure was eve actually agreed - and now it's
 biting back?

I think it was put in place to avoid discussion about what to name the 
levels.  In that it has been quite successful.  I think that discussion 
would still be underway and no one would be happy, if we'd tried to use 
names for the values instead.

-Alex Mauer hawke



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Iván Sánchez Ortega
El Viernes, 30 de Mayo de 2008, Lester Caine escribió:
 Personally I've been viewing admin_level=0 as the world.

Yeah, say that again when extraterrestrials invade us :-P

 admin_level=1 should equal the continents

I'm against this definition. A continent is a geographical separation, not an 
administrative/political one.

I'd say that admin_level=1 should separate supranational *economic* entities, 
i.e:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Union
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_South_American_Nations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Union
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Union
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Asian_Union
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Task_Force_on_North_America
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization_of_Central_American_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Southeast_Asian_Nations


-- 
--
Iván Sánchez Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Executive ability is prominent in your make-up.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Lester Caine
Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
 El Viernes, 30 de Mayo de 2008, Lester Caine escribió:
 Personally I've been viewing admin_level=0 as the world.
 
 Yeah, say that again when extraterrestrials invade us :-P
we can always have -ve number ;)

 admin_level=1 should equal the continents
 
 I'm against this definition. A continent is a geographical separation, not an 
 administrative/political one.
 
 I'd say that admin_level=1 should separate supranational *economic* entities, 
 i.e:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Union
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_South_American_Nations
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Union
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Union
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Asian_Union
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Task_Force_on_North_America
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization_of_Central_American_States
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Southeast_Asian_Nations

And European Union ?
I'm not bothered that these levels are numbers, it is just that the CURRENT 
numbers do not allow for ALL of the levels as THIS list suggests.

I still think there is a place for continents here rather than having to 
create yet another set of numbers? Africa, Asia and the rest are USED to 
provide administrative type grouping just as African Union and Asian Union do.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-30 Thread Lester Caine
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
 On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Lester Caine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I'm not bothered that these levels are numbers, it is just that the CURRENT
 numbers do not allow for ALL of the levels as THIS list suggests.

 I still think there is a place for continents here rather than having to
 create yet another set of numbers? Africa, Asia and the rest are USED to
 provide administrative type grouping just as African Union and Asian Union 
 do.
 
 Problem is that they violate the nesting rule: countries can span
 multiple continents. Similarly continents are defined strictly by
 geographical features (where the land meets the sea) whereas country
 borders reach a distance into the sea, so they violate the covering
 idea also.
 
 I don't have any good ideas about how to do continents (and by
 extension the large oceans like Atlantic/Pacific/Indian/Southern/etc),
 but I don't think admin_level is the right place. I don't think a
 single country border runs along a continent border so you're not even
 saving space.

Same applies to any of the country boundaries, do you draw high water line, or 
the international demarcation out on the continental shelf.
And England and Ireland are part of Europe and the EU so do you include the 
water around them or not.

The 'nesting' rule does not exist. We have already had enough examples of 
where boundaries form different 'sets' of areas so there is no way to insist 
that the 'admin' boundaries are mutually exclusive :(

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Steve Chilton
Scotland and Wales are countries.

Don't think the border between N Ireland and Rep of Ireland has been
digitised yet.

 

Cheers

STEVE

 

Steve Chilton, Learning Support Fellow
Learning and Technical Support Unit Manager
School of Health and Social Sciences
Middlesex University
phone/fax: 020 8411 5355
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mdx.ac.uk/schools/hssc/staff/profiles/technical/chiltons.asp

Chair of the Society of Cartographers: http://www.soc.org.uk/

SoC conference 2008:
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/cartographers08/ 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Juan Lucas
Dominguez Rubio
Sent: 29 May 2008 07:57
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

 

According to Mapnik, Scotland and Wales have declared independence, and
Northern Ireland is part of the Republic of Ireland. Did I miss
something?  

 

Lucas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Dermot McNally
2008/5/29 Steve Chilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Scotland and Wales are countries.

Only in the same traditional folk-consciousness way that Bavaria or
Hessen are. So while it's certainly an important thing to reflect on
the map, the boundaries between the UK components (sub-countries?)
shouldn't render the same as those between actual states.

 Don't think the border between N Ireland and Rep of Ireland has been
 digitised yet.

It has, but it's inaccurate. I've been correcting it in stages. But
Juan is right - whereas it used to appear on the Mapnik layer, it has
now vanished. I think the problem here is that there's great variety
in how boundaries are currently tagged. I didn't originally tag the
Irish border, so I haven't bothered to check whether it corresponds
with latest thinking.

BTW, Juan, you should probably avoid suggesting to Irish people that
they live on a British island ;)

Dermot

-- 
--
Iren sind menschlich

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio
OSM's (official?) motto  is your own map of the world. I guess I didn't quite 
understand it until today. Thanks for putting me wise ;-)
 
Cheers,
Lucas



De: Tom Chance [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: jue 29/05/2008 12:16
Para: talk@openstreetmap.org
CC: Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio; Steve Chilton
Asunto: Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands



France and Germany share the same currency, Iceland has no army, Australia and
England share the same head of state, Scotland has its own Parliament with
certain devolved powers that are different to Wales' elected Assembly.

Then there's a difference between Britain, the British Isles, the United
Kingdom and the Commonwealth.

Let's not get carried away! Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are countries 
with national borders, so those should be shown the same as any other
national border.

Tom

On Thursday 29 May 2008 11:12:32 Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio wrote:
 Scotland and England share the same currency, army, head of state and
 parliament. Sweden and Norway do not share those things. Nobody thinks that
 difference should be visible in a map?

 Cheers,
 Lucas

 

 De: Steve Chilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Enviado el: jue 29/05/2008 11:20
 Para: Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio; talk@openstreetmap.org
 Asunto: RE: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands



 Scotland and Wales are countries.

 Don't think the border between N Ireland and Rep of Ireland has been
 digitised yet.



 Cheers

 STEVE



 Steve Chilton, Learning Support Fellow
 Learning and Technical Support Unit Manager
 School of Health and Social Sciences
 Middlesex University
 phone/fax: 020 8411 5355
 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.mdx.ac.uk/schools/hssc/staff/profiles/technical/chiltons.asp

 Chair of the Society of Cartographers: http://www.soc.org.uk/

 SoC conference 2008:
 http://www.abdn.ac.uk/cartographers08/

 

 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Juan Lucas Dominguez
 Rubio Sent: 29 May 2008 07:57
 To: talk@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands



 According to Mapnik, Scotland and Wales have declared independence, and
 Northern Ireland is part of the Republic of Ireland. Did I miss something?



 Lucas




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Dermot McNally
2008/5/29 Tom Chance [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Let's not get carried away! Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are countries
 with national borders, so those should be shown the same as any other
 national border.

Well, in a UK context, NI is actually a province, and isn't Wales a
principality? Either way, none of them issue their own passports or
maintain separate EU membership, so you can't really claim that they
are as separate from each other as countries that do have these
trappings of statehood.

I've just fixed the Irish border, which luckily presents no such
dilemma, as it is an international border, even by non-UK criteria. It
lacked  admin_level=2.

Dermot

-- 
--
Iren sind menschlich

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio
Scotland and England share the same currency, army, head of state and 
parliament. Sweden and Norway do not share those things. Nobody thinks that 
difference should be visible in a map?  
 
Cheers,
Lucas



De: Steve Chilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviado el: jue 29/05/2008 11:20
Para: Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio; talk@openstreetmap.org
Asunto: RE: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands



Scotland and Wales are countries.

Don't think the border between N Ireland and Rep of Ireland has been digitised 
yet.

 

Cheers

STEVE

 

Steve Chilton, Learning Support Fellow
Learning and Technical Support Unit Manager
School of Health and Social Sciences
Middlesex University
phone/fax: 020 8411 5355
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mdx.ac.uk/schools/hssc/staff/profiles/technical/chiltons.asp

Chair of the Society of Cartographers: http://www.soc.org.uk/

SoC conference 2008:
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/cartographers08/ 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Juan Lucas 
Dominguez Rubio
Sent: 29 May 2008 07:57
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

 

According to Mapnik, Scotland and Wales have declared independence, and 
Northern Ireland is part of the Republic of Ireland. Did I miss something?  

 

Lucas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Shaun McDonald

On 29 May 2008, at 11:41, Dermot McNally wrote:

 2008/5/29 Richard Fairhurst [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Dermot McNally wrote:

 2008/5/29 Steve Chilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Scotland and Wales are countries.

 Only in the same traditional folk-consciousness way that Bavaria or
 Hessen are.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom

 thinks it's a bit more than that.

 On the contrary - certainly in the case of Bavaria, which really was a
 country until 1918. But we've neatly illustrated the point.
 Non-Germans don't see why Bavaria would see itself as a country, even
 though it does. Non-British people (and, it seems, half of England)
 don't as a rule regard Scotland or Wales as countries on a par with,
 say, France. And as an Irish person, I've encountered my share of
 people who don't think my country is a real one either.


Seemingly a lot of people seem to regard the UK as England. It's not  
the first time someone's asked me what it's like in England. Until  
about 6 weeks ago I was unable to tell them because I had never lived  
in England until then.

Shaun

 But the clue here is that we're discussing the appropriate use of
 boundary tagging, specifically a thing we call admin_level. I guess
 none of us will disagree that Germany and the UK get to exercise a
 higher level of administration than a country like England or Wales?

 Dermot

 -- 
 --
 Iren sind menschlich

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Dermot McNally
2008/5/29 Richard Fairhurst [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Dermot McNally wrote:

 2008/5/29 Steve Chilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Scotland and Wales are countries.

 Only in the same traditional folk-consciousness way that Bavaria or
 Hessen are.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom

 thinks it's a bit more than that.

On the contrary - certainly in the case of Bavaria, which really was a
country until 1918. But we've neatly illustrated the point.
Non-Germans don't see why Bavaria would see itself as a country, even
though it does. Non-British people (and, it seems, half of England)
don't as a rule regard Scotland or Wales as countries on a par with,
say, France. And as an Irish person, I've encountered my share of
people who don't think my country is a real one either.

But the clue here is that we're discussing the appropriate use of
boundary tagging, specifically a thing we call admin_level. I guess
none of us will disagree that Germany and the UK get to exercise a
higher level of administration than a country like England or Wales?

Dermot

-- 
--
Iren sind menschlich

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Lauri Hahne
2008/5/29 Dermot McNally [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 2008/5/29 Tom Chance [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

  Let's not get carried away! Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are
 countries
  with national borders, so those should be shown the same as any other
  national border.

 Well, in a UK context, NI is actually a province, and isn't Wales a
 principality? Either way, none of them issue their own passports or
 maintain separate EU membership, so you can't really claim that they
 are as separate from each other as countries that do have these
 trappings of statehood.



But they do have their own football teams which decides this issue. :D



-- 
Lauri Hahne
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Dave Stubbs
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 According to Mapnik, Scotland and Wales have declared independence, and
 Northern Ireland is part of the Republic of Ireland. Did I miss something?



The NI border hasn't been put into the OSM database.

As for Wales and Scotland... well that's just an interesting
perspective... it surely could have been England that declared
independence?... anyway..

This is just an indication of the conflicted definition of country,
nation, and national. The borders are in the OSM DB as admin_level 2
(national border).
You try telling any one of those nationalities that they're not
actually a country I'll stand well back when you do it.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Dermot McNally
2008/5/29 Dave Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 The NI border hasn't been put into the OSM database.

It has. I've been tweaking bits of it for months now. Look for ID 24428706.

 This is just an indication of the conflicted definition of country,
 nation, and national. The borders are in the OSM DB as admin_level 2
 (national border).
 You try telling any one of those nationalities that they're not
 actually a country I'll stand well back when you do it.

The word country needn't be a stumbling block here. That's just
language. In German, Land can mean Bundesland just as often as it
means country. But we can't go tagging UK internal borders the same
way as we do those of sovereign states, because it doesn't accurately
depict reality.

There are plenty of people in Ireland who would resent the Irish
border being described as an international one, but sovereignty is a
well understood concept that has to be reflected accurately on the
map.

Dermot

-- 
--
Iren sind menschlich

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Bruce Cowan
On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 08:57 +0200, Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio wrote:
 According to Mapnik, Scotland and Wales have declared independence,
 and Northern Ireland is part of the Republic of Ireland. Did I miss
 something?  

Give it a few years, then it will be true.

Seriously, the number system for borders is rather strange, surely there
must be a more obvious scale. I suppose this has been mentioned before
though.
-- 
Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Robert (Jamie) Munro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Dermot McNally wrote:
|
| But the clue here is that we're discussing the appropriate use of
| boundary tagging, specifically a thing we call admin_level. I guess
| none of us will disagree that Germany and the UK get to exercise a
| higher level of administration than a country like England or Wales?

I've always thought that England / Scotland / Wales / Northern Ireland
forming the UK are pretty similar to the 50 states forming the USA - I
think it would be reasonable to use the same markings on the default map
to divide them.

Legal purists may want different (or extra) tags in the database on the
grounds that it's a completely different situation, but they could be
rendered the same.

Robert (Jamie) Munro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkg+rxIACgkQz+aYVHdncI0KeQCg5TiY6CzGVhPCi8P+Vf9AmQam
f4EAniZKu7dP40obhJ115MxVNOTxSWor
=+A58
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Dave Stubbs
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Dermot McNally [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 2008/5/29 Dave Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 The NI border hasn't been put into the OSM database.

 It has. I've been tweaking bits of it for months now. Look for ID 24428706.

 This is just an indication of the conflicted definition of country,
 nation, and national. The borders are in the OSM DB as admin_level 2
 (national border).
 You try telling any one of those nationalities that they're not
 actually a country I'll stand well back when you do it.

 The word country needn't be a stumbling block here. That's just
 language.

Who says I was just talking about language? Nobody said (as in the
current wiki page doesn't) admin_level=2 represents sovereign states
recognised by the UN... or whatever the concrete definition is that
you're getting at. It says country borders, such as the border
between Austria and Germany. That's open to some interpretation,
which may not have been the intention of the people writing the page,
but there you go.


 In German, Land can mean Bundesland just as often as it
 means country. But we can't go tagging UK internal borders the same
 way as we do those of sovereign states, because it doesn't accurately
 depict reality.

Depends what reality you're trying to depict :-). Again, I get what
you're saying and would tend to agree when using the same definition
you're using, but I'd still stand back a bit when trying to explain it

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Lars Aronsson
Shaun McDonald wrote:

 Seemingly a lot of people seem to regard the UK as England. It's 
 not the first time someone's asked me what it's like in England. 
 Until about 6 weeks ago I was unable to tell them because I had 
 never lived in England until then.

Same thing with Sweden!  Foreigners insist on using the Viking age 
(9th - 11th century) name Sweden / Schweden / Suede.  Even the 
Icelanders who should know better say Sviþioð.  But this refers to 
the middle section (Svealand) of the united kingdom of Svealand, 
Götaland and Wendes, known since at least the 14th century as Svea 
rike or Sverige.  For heaven's sake, our nation's coat of arms 
carries the three crowns, as does our airforce and our national 
hockey team, to indicate that Sweden is the true United Kingdom,

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Crowns

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_arms_of_Sweden

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Air_Force

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden_national_men%27s_ice_hockey_team

Bloody ignorant foreigners!  Stop calling us Sweden!


-- 
  Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread simon


 BTW, Juan, you should probably avoid suggesting to Irish people that
 they live on a British island ;)


Just imagine the protests at the State of the Map



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Lester Caine
Forgot to hit reply all ;)

Shaun McDonald wrote:
 On 29 May 2008, at 13:31, Bruce Cowan wrote:
 
 On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 08:57 +0200, Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio wrote:
 According to Mapnik, Scotland and Wales have declared independence,
 and Northern Ireland is part of the Republic of Ireland. Did I miss
 something?
 Give it a few years, then it will be true.
 
 Seriously, the number system for borders is rather strange, surely  
 there
 must be a more obvious scale. I suppose this has been mentioned before
 though.
 
 I thought people are using things like district, country, city, town  
 etc for the boundaries, rather than a numeric value.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:boundary
Is basically wrong - UK boundary should be admin_level=2
admin_level=3 should be used for the separate England/ Scotland/ Wales
boundaries :)

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Bruce Cowan
On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 14:26 +0100, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:

 I've always thought that England / Scotland / Wales / Northern Ireland
 forming the UK are pretty similar to the 50 states forming the USA - I
 think it would be reasonable to use the same markings on the default map
 to divide them.
 
 Legal purists may want different (or extra) tags in the database on the
 grounds that it's a completely different situation, but they could be
 rendered the same.

For all purposes, this is probably reasonably accurate apart from the
fact that one state has no devolution, 2 have devolution and one has
further devolution. For the purposes of a map, the precise nature of the
powers of each part are negligible.

I suppose technically the USA is similar as each state has different
powers available to them (or I think they do).
-- 
Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread elvin ibbotson
This discussion about the national status of England, Scotland, Wales  
and Ulster is very entertaining but is not going to reach a  
conclusion without another war. Personally I would give these  
countries the same status as states as they are effectively states  
within the United Kingdom or (with the exception of Ulster) Great  
Britain.


This strand of the discussion (below) though echoes the earlier  
thread I kicked off (but gave up pursuing because there seemed to be  
more prejudice than logic in the discussion) about the idea of  
numerically-based properties in the database mapped to human-friendly  
language in editors and viewers. Most of that discussion was about  
highways but similar arguments seem to apply to boundaries. I think  
most British mappers would be happier selecting from a boundary sub- 
menu of 'National', 'County', 'District', 'parish', with each choice  
invisibly mapped back to the appropriate numerical boundary type than  
with the clumsy 'boundary=administrative' 'admin_level=4' approach.  
In other countries/languages, other words would map to the same numbers.


But isn't this democratic/anarchic approach to mapping great? I'm  
going to put a national/state level boundary around our village and  
name it Isle of Man, resulting in some worthwhile reductions in taxes  
and a free grandstand seat for the TT races next month :-)


elvin ibbotson


From: Shaun McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 29 May 2008 13:43:43 BDT
To: Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

On 29 May 2008, at 13:31, Bruce Cowan wrote:

Seriously, the number system for borders is rather strange, surely  
there

must be a more obvious scale. I suppose this has been mentioned before
though.



I thought people are using things like district, country, city, town  
etc for the boundaries, rather than a numeric value.



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Beau Gunderson
Surprised no one has posted this link yet:

   http://qntm.org/?uk

A nice Venn diagram of the UK. :)


Beau

On 5/29/08, Robert (Jamie) Munro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1

 Dermot McNally wrote:
 |
 | But the clue here is that we're discussing the appropriate use of
 | boundary tagging, specifically a thing we call admin_level. I guess
 | none of us will disagree that Germany and the UK get to exercise a
 | higher level of administration than a country like England or Wales?

 I've always thought that England / Scotland / Wales / Northern Ireland
 forming the UK are pretty similar to the 50 states forming the USA - I
 think it would be reasonable to use the same markings on the default map
 to divide them.

 Legal purists may want different (or extra) tags in the database on the
 grounds that it's a completely different situation, but they could be
 rendered the same.

 Robert (Jamie) Munro
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
 Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

 iEYEARECAAYFAkg+rxIACgkQz+aYVHdncI0KeQCg5TiY6CzGVhPCi8P+Vf9AmQam
 f4EAniZKu7dP40obhJ115MxVNOTxSWor
 =+A58
 -END PGP SIGNATURE-

 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk


Re: [OSM-talk] National borders in the British Islands

2008-05-29 Thread Dave Stubbs
 This strand of the discussion (below) though echoes the earlier thread I
 kicked off (but gave up pursuing because there seemed to be more prejudice
 than logic in the discussion) about the idea of numerically-based properties
 in the database mapped to human-friendly language in editors and viewers.

OMG is your brain mush? This whole nonsense is over what admin_level
(a numerical tagging scheme) maps to. It's the perfect example of why
numbering the bloomin tags doesn't necessarily actually solve
anything. It's also the perfect example of how a global numbering
system is utterly irrelevant given our ability to invent domain and
ordering specific ones on a whim.


 Most of that discussion was about highways but similar arguments seem to
 apply to boundaries. I think most British mappers would be happier selecting
 from a boundary sub-menu of 'National', 'County', 'District', 'parish', with
 each choice invisibly mapped back to the appropriate numerical boundary type
 than with the clumsy 'boundary=administrative' 'admin_level=4' approach.

Yes, I'm sure they would rather pick from such a menu. Mapping to the
relevant boundary and admin_level tags should be trivial as the wiki
page manages it. I'm sure implementations are welcome.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk