Re: [Talk-GB] Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels

2009-06-13 Thread Peter Miller


On 13 Jun 2009, at 09:30, Peter Childs wrote:


2009/6/11 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk:

And here is the current OSM guidance:-
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level

In order to tie in with NUTS and with guidance for other
countries
within OSM we might want to do the following for England
(Scotland
and Wales would be similar but would skip some levels):-

UK (admin_level=2)
England/Wales/Scotland (admin_level=4)
English regions (North East, East of England etc) (also
admin_level=4
as per NUTS)
Ceremonial counties - where they exist (admin_level= 5)
County Councils/Unitary Authorities (admin-level=6)
Districts  (admin-level=8)  districts / London boroughs /
metropolitan
boroughs.




Whats the simplest way of adding a boundary? I notice that Medway does
not have one, I know ruthley where it should be, but have no idea of
how to go about adding the relevant relation/way. I'm fine adding
Roads and smaller stuff but the boundary stuff just throws me.


It is better to use a relation for the boundary rather than way tags  
which used to be the only way to do it. Add the appropriate existing  
ways (rivers/roads etc) to a new relation. You may need to split roads/ 
rivers where the boundary diverges. For some sections of the boundary  
you will need to add new ways (where it goes across fields). I just  
add a 'note=administrative boundary' tag to those ways.


The only source of data we can legally use for the boundary to by  
knowledge is the NPE maps base which shows boundaries as a dotted line  
if you are lucky and if they have not moved in the past 50 years. I  
also check wikipedia as a cross check (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EnglandMedway.png 
) and then the official council website to see if there is general  
agreement on the shape and extent.


It isn't perfect - to be perfect our democratic government will need  
to persuade the OS to give its citizens the boundaries by which it is  
governed. Until now lets do the best we can and when people say they  
are wrong we will ask them to provide the information to correct it!


Btw, OSM and the UK Boundaries project got a mention on the Guardians  
data blog yesterday.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/jun/11/opensourc




Regards,


Peter





Peter.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


Re: [Talk-GB] Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels

2009-06-13 Thread Thomas Wood
2009/6/13 Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com:

 On 13 Jun 2009, at 09:30, Peter Childs wrote:

 2009/6/11 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk:

 And here is the current OSM guidance:-

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level

 In order to tie in with NUTS and with guidance for other

 countries

 within OSM we might want to do the following for England

 (Scotland

 and Wales would be similar but would skip some levels):-

 UK (admin_level=2)

 England/Wales/Scotland (admin_level=4)

 English regions (North East, East of England etc) (also

 admin_level=4

 as per NUTS)

 Ceremonial counties - where they exist (admin_level= 5)

 County Councils/Unitary Authorities (admin-level=6)

 Districts  (admin-level=8)  districts / London boroughs /

 metropolitan

 boroughs.


 Whats the simplest way of adding a boundary? I notice that Medway does
 not have one, I know ruthley where it should be, but have no idea of
 how to go about adding the relevant relation/way. I'm fine adding
 Roads and smaller stuff but the boundary stuff just throws me.

 It is better to use a relation for the boundary rather than way tags which
 used to be the only way to do it. Add the appropriate existing ways
 (rivers/roads etc) to a new relation. You may need to split roads/rivers
 where the boundary diverges. For some sections of the boundary you will need
 to add new ways (where it goes across fields). I just add a
 'note=administrative boundary' tag to those ways.
 The only source of data we can legally use for the boundary to by knowledge
 is the NPE maps base which shows boundaries as a dotted line if you are
 lucky and if they have not moved in the past 50 years. I also check
 wikipedia as a cross check
 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EnglandMedway.png) and then the official
 council website to see if there is general agreement on the shape and
 extent.
 It isn't perfect - to be perfect our democratic government will need to
 persuade the OS to give its citizens the boundaries by which it is governed.
 Until now lets do the best we can and when people say they are wrong we will
 ask them to provide the information to correct it!
 Btw, OSM and the UK Boundaries project got a mention on the Guardians data
 blog yesterday.
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/jun/11/opensourc



 Regards,

 Peter



 Peter.

I think there is value in also tagging the way with at least
boundary=administrative, especially ways that would otherwise only
have the relation. The relation model does not completely surpass the
old tagging scheme.

-- 
Regards,
Thomas Wood
(Edgemaster)

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


Re: [Talk-GB] Tank=yes?

2009-06-13 Thread Peter Childs
2009/6/12 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk:
 I'd suggest hazard=tanks (plural).

 I've not seen signs warning about tanks, but did have to give way to
 one at a t-junction once on the road from Wolverhampton to Cosford
 (as I joined it on the road from Shifnal). You could feel the road
 (and car) vibrating long before you knew what was causing it...

 Ed



 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


A352 between Wool and Wareham, has a Hazard Sign for Tanks, it also
has a 40 mile an hour speed limit for Cars and 20mph for Tracked
Vehicles ie Tanks. Forgot to check where exactly it started and
finished however while I was driving on Holiday.

Peter.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


Re: [Talk-GB] Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels

2009-06-13 Thread Peter Childs
2009/6/13 Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com:

 On 13 Jun 2009, at 09:30, Peter Childs wrote:

 2009/6/11 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk:

 And here is the current OSM guidance:-

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level

 In order to tie in with NUTS and with guidance for other

 countries

 within OSM we might want to do the following for England

 (Scotland

 and Wales would be similar but would skip some levels):-

 UK (admin_level=2)

 England/Wales/Scotland (admin_level=4)

 English regions (North East, East of England etc) (also

 admin_level=4

 as per NUTS)

 Ceremonial counties - where they exist (admin_level= 5)

 County Councils/Unitary Authorities (admin-level=6)

 Districts  (admin-level=8)  districts / London boroughs /

 metropolitan

 boroughs.


 Whats the simplest way of adding a boundary? I notice that Medway does
 not have one, I know ruthley where it should be, but have no idea of
 how to go about adding the relevant relation/way. I'm fine adding
 Roads and smaller stuff but the boundary stuff just throws me.

 It is better to use a relation for the boundary rather than way tags which
 used to be the only way to do it. Add the appropriate existing ways
 (rivers/roads etc) to a new relation. You may need to split roads/rivers
 where the boundary diverges. For some sections of the boundary you will need
 to add new ways (where it goes across fields). I just add a
 'note=administrative boundary' tag to those ways.
 The only source of data we can legally use for the boundary to by knowledge
 is the NPE maps base which shows boundaries as a dotted line if you are
 lucky and if they have not moved in the past 50 years. I also check
 wikipedia as a cross check

Given that Medway is less than 50 years old that could be a problem.

 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EnglandMedway.png) and then the official
 council website to see if there is general agreement on the shape and
 extent.
 It isn't perfect - to be perfect our democratic government will need to
 persuade the OS to give its citizens the boundaries by which it is governed.
 Until now lets do the best we can and when people say they are wrong we will
 ask them to provide the information to correct it!
 Btw, OSM and the UK Boundaries project got a mention on the Guardians data
 blog yesterday.
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/jun/11/opensourc


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb