Nicely done Augustin.
Nominatim search result window now shows these boundaries. For example, if you
search for Saint-Louis, Senegal, it will show Saint-Louis boundary. You have
then the choice to see the limits over the OpenStreetMap or to see the relation
(View detail hyperlink).
Pierre
>________________________________
> De : Augustin Doury <[email protected]>
>À : william skora <[email protected]>; Pierre Béland
><[email protected]>; [email protected]
>Cc : [email protected]; talk-sn <[email protected]>;
>"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>Envoyé le : Dimanche 30 juin 2013 12h34
>Objet : Re: [HOT] Import data from ARD-Saint-Louis, Senegal
>
>
>
>Hi Skora, Pierre and Andrew,
>
>Thank you for your answer!
>
>I reply to Skora here but your points are evoked too (admin_level on a
>type:point & boundary=administrative on the relation + members ways)
>
>
>I've imported "communes"(type point) and "Chef Lieux des Communautés Rurales"
>(type point) yesterday and finished the import today with "Limites des
>Communautés Rurales".
>
>
>From rural communities, I've deducted boundaries for the three departments of
>Saint-Louis region (Saint-Louis, Dagana, Podor) and for the 7 arrondissements
>(Ndiaye, Mbane, Cas-Cas, Gamadji Sarre, Saldé, Rao, Thillé Boubacar) and I've
>edited it in OSM. I put a note on the relations linked to Cas-Cas and Ndiaye
>arrondissements because I have not found their admin_centers (Cas-Cas village
>and Ndiaye village).
>
>
>
>Response below :
>
>
>
>
>On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 2:15 AM, william skora <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi Augustin,
>>
>>As someone who has worked with HOT and studied in St. Louis, Senegal, I am
>>excited to see this happen. I have a couple questions and suggestions:
>>
>>- It's generally preferred to use a create a specific user name for imports
>>and not to use your own account.
>>
>>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines#Use_a_dedicated_user_account
>>
>>a user name like 2013ARD_STL_IMPORTS for example, would be appropriate.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>Too late for that, sorry to the community. According to the guideline : "the
>user's editing history is a permanent record of the source and
doesn't interfere with tags or increase the size of the database as much".
>
>Import is really small so I guess it's ok but thank you for this information
>which is pertinent and good to know.
>
>
>As I understand, it's not necessary to add the tag source=ARD_STL;CSE to each
>way if you add the source=ARD_STL;CSE to the changeset.
>>
>
>
>I added the tag source=ARD_STL;CSE to each way.
>
>Administrative boundaries already present in Saint-Louis Region (borders with
>Louga Region and Mauritanie) were always tagged with source=*, stipulating an
>URL linked to the original data.
>Because different sources are used in the same region (ARD_STL;CSE is the
>third one) for admin boundaries, I think it's easier to know the source by a
>simple click instead to download history.
>
>
>Once again, I agree with the fact that this process is heavy for the database,
>not really in this case because the import is small. But if you think that it
>shouldn't be done on principle, this would be really easy to delete.
>
>
>
>>
>>For the "communes" (type point)" - As nodes, they do not need to have
>>admin_level=8 to them. I think just place=* , name=* would be sufficient.
>>
>
>
>I hesitated for a longtime on this point.
>
>"Commune" is a special admin status for a village or town or city.
>> place=* and name=* don't mention this specific status wich is the same
>> admin_level as "Communautés rurales" (admin_level=8).
>
>I thought that admin_level=8 helped to keep this information and would be
>useful when official administrative boundaries would be known.
>
>Moreover, use of admin_level=* on a type:point don't seem to be incoherent
>according to TagInfo
>
>
>Once again, this would be really easy to delete if necessary.
>
>
>>Regarding the
>>shapefile "Limite_Communauté_Rurale"
>>
>>I am not sure if it necessary to add the tag boundary=administrative and
>>admin_level=8 to the member ways. I have seen boundaries where only the
>>relation has tags (for example
>>http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/219920348) but I also have seen
>>boundary=administrative tagged on the relation as well as the relation - as
>>described in
>>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_France/Tracer_les_limites_administratives#Sur_les_membres_4
>>
>>
>>which is listed as a reference in the SN tagging guide -
>>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:WikiProject_Senegal#Fronti.C3.A8res_administratives
>>
>
>
>I think both methods are valid.
>
>You give the good links and reasons to this choice here :
>
>"I also have seen boundary=administrative tagged on the relation as well as
>the relation - as described in
>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_France/Tracer_les_limites_administratives#Sur_les_membres_4
>
>which is listed as a reference in the SN tagging guide -
>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:WikiProject_Senegal#Fronti.C3.A8res_administratives";
>
>
>>
>>Most importantly,
>>
>>If you could send a small example .osm that would consist of the data that
>>you wish to upload, I would greatly appreciate it and would be very helpful
>>to better understand the import.
>>
>
>
>I saved some work during edition, it's linked to this email as a .osm file.
>Becareful, this data is obsolete. Only 16 of the 18 rural communities were
>edited. Departements and arrondissements were not edited.
>
>
>
>>
>>These are just my interpretations of OSM community consensus and existing
>>practice, I hope to hear others' opinions and interpretations as well.
>>
>>
>>
>>Cordialement,
>>Will Skora
>>
>
>
>Très bonne soirée!
>
>
>Augustin
>
>
>
>--
>
>Augustin Doury
>+33688728760
>
>_______________________________________________
>HOT mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
HOT mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
