Re: [datameet] Re: Shapefiles for complete India
I think I have the explanation for why I am seeing a good match and you are not: The problem lies in defining what is the 'sub-district' unit (in IND_adm3). Administratively speaking, it is tehsil, below which lies CD block. Unfortunately, census gives information by CD block. So there are more 'sub-district' units in Census than tehsils in the country. GDAM seems to have followed the tehsil concept. To check: Karnataka is one state in which tehsil and CD block are one and the same. That is why the sub-district layer IND_adm3 matches perfectly for Karnataka, but not for other states. There might be some other states where this holds good, I don't know. Anyway, so if one really wants CD block level boundaries, we have to look at Justin, I guess. But the GDAM boundaries are not 'wrong'. Sharad On 07-Aug-14 9:48 AM, Devdatta Tengshe wrote: In Continuation of my previous email, here is a CSV file which shows just how bad the GDAM dataset is. Regards, Devdatta On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Devdatta Tengshe devda...@tengshe.in mailto:devda...@tengshe.in wrote: Hi Sharad, I just download the GDAM data again, to confirm what you have said. I'm going to have to disagree with you about the quality of the IND_adm3 data. Acoording to the 2001 Census, there are 5454 Sub Districts in India http://www.socialjustice.nic.in/pdf/tab11.pdf. The GDAM dataset has just 2299 features. So clearly these taluk features do not correspond to the 2001 Census. I cross checked for some areas I have ground knowledge of, and I can say that this dataset is not from any specific era. Some tehsils in the file were created post 2001, while others created in the 90's were not present. In my opinion the GDAM data is pretty much unusable. Regards, Devdatta On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Sharad Lele sharad.l...@gmail.com mailto:sharad.l...@gmail.com wrote: I have downloaded and checked the GADM boundaries (my version is 2011). The taluka boundary layer probably holds good today, becuase few talukas get split. Districts get split regularly (every so many years) so the district boundary layer in this GADM set is quite of date (may apply to 2001 or so). The spatial registration (positional accuracy is ~1km, and the spatial detail is of course not as good as the boundaries given in a Survey of India 50k topo, but then that is an unfair standard, so by a more generalized standard, the quality is okay. Sharad On Monday, August 4, 2014 7:20:38 PM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: Mr Thakkar, Please also look at another post (more than one) on this group about Taluk Shapefiles by Justin Meyers So far as I know GADM is the source that has Taluk files. I am not sure about its completeness and accuracy as on today http://www.gadm.org/ On Monday, August 4, 2014 6:23:07 PM UTC+5:30, D Thakker wrote: thanks Dilip for your hardwork. I have been on a lookout for all taluka / tehsil shape file, so how do I be in a loop as I am very keen to see the repository mail / list. On Monday, August 4, 2014 9:50:26 AM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: Sharad, I am working on some things will revert in about a week or may be more. Thejesh, Go ahead, Actually there was one more source a Low Resolution (vertices) District map by VDS technologies. I have it as Polylines in Autocad. I seem to have lost the original file. If anyone has then please share it. (it does not seem to be on their site now) On Sunday, August 3, 2014 11:32:43 PM UTC+5:30, Thejesh GN wrote: Actually its not a bad idea to list it on the wiki. Let me know i will create an account. -- Thejesh GN ⏚ ತೇಜೇಶ್ ಜಿ.ಎನ್ http://thejeshgn.com GPG ID : 0xBFFC8DD3C06DD6B0 On Aug 3, 2014 10:15 PM, Sharad Lele shara...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Dilip and others: I have been following this thread with interest, but to be honest am a bit lost now. Can someone post a summary of which maps mentioned so far have what features (which coverage, pertaining to which year, what
Re: [datameet] IT Act in Karnataka
does anyone have the full text of the law? On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:03 PM, srinivas kodali iota.kod...@gmail.com wrote: It seems the new IT Act in Karnataka gives the government enough power to arrest you before you even commit an actual crime. Is this really true? this would be a huge set back for any open data activist. You could be jailed for simple scraping of public website. http://www.bangaloremirror.com/Bangalore/Cover-story/We-the-goondas/articleshow/39564603.cms Regards, Srinivas -- Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more about us by visiting http://datameet.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups datameet group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to datameet+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Nisha Thompson DataMeet.org ni...@datameet.org skype: nishaqt mobile: 962-061-2245 -- Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more about us by visiting http://datameet.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups datameet group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to datameet+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [datameet] Re: Shapefiles for complete India
If I am right, then Justin may want to rename his layer as CDBlocks_2001... Sharad On Thursday, August 7, 2014 4:28:17 PM UTC+5:30, Sharad Lele wrote: I think I have the explanation for why I am seeing a good match and you are not: The problem lies in defining what is the 'sub-district' unit (in IND_adm3). Administratively speaking, it is tehsil, below which lies CD block. Unfortunately, census gives information by CD block. So there are more 'sub-district' units in Census than tehsils in the country. GDAM seems to have followed the tehsil concept. To check: Karnataka is one state in which tehsil and CD block are one and the same. That is why the sub-district layer IND_adm3 matches perfectly for Karnataka, but not for other states. There might be some other states where this holds good, I don't know. Anyway, so if one really wants CD block level boundaries, we have to look at Justin, I guess. But the GDAM boundaries are not 'wrong'. Sharad On 07-Aug-14 9:48 AM, Devdatta Tengshe wrote: In Continuation of my previous email, here is a CSV file which shows just how bad the GDAM dataset is. Regards, Devdatta On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Devdatta Tengshe devda...@tengshe.in wrote: Hi Sharad, I just download the GDAM data again, to confirm what you have said. I'm going to have to disagree with you about the quality of the IND_adm3 data. Acoording to the 2001 Census, there are 5454 Sub Districts in India http://www.socialjustice.nic.in/pdf/tab11.pdf. The GDAM dataset has just 2299 features. So clearly these taluk features do not correspond to the 2001 Census. I cross checked for some areas I have ground knowledge of, and I can say that this dataset is not from any specific era. Some tehsils in the file were created post 2001, while others created in the 90's were not present. In my opinion the GDAM data is pretty much unusable. Regards, Devdatta On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Sharad Lele sharad.l...@gmail.com wrote: I have downloaded and checked the GADM boundaries (my version is 2011). The taluka boundary layer probably holds good today, becuase few talukas get split. Districts get split regularly (every so many years) so the district boundary layer in this GADM set is quite of date (may apply to 2001 or so). The spatial registration (positional accuracy is ~1km, and the spatial detail is of course not as good as the boundaries given in a Survey of India 50k topo, but then that is an unfair standard, so by a more generalized standard, the quality is okay. Sharad On Monday, August 4, 2014 7:20:38 PM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: Mr Thakkar, Please also look at another post (more than one) on this group about Taluk Shapefiles by Justin Meyers So far as I know GADM is the source that has Taluk files. I am not sure about its completeness and accuracy as on today http://www.gadm.org/ On Monday, August 4, 2014 6:23:07 PM UTC+5:30, D Thakker wrote: thanks Dilip for your hardwork. I have been on a lookout for all taluka / tehsil shape file, so how do I be in a loop as I am very keen to see the repository mail / list. On Monday, August 4, 2014 9:50:26 AM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: Sharad, I am working on some things will revert in about a week or may be more. Thejesh, Go ahead, Actually there was one more source a Low Resolution (vertices) District map by VDS technologies. I have it as Polylines in Autocad. I seem to have lost the original file. If anyone has then please share it. (it does not seem to be on their site now) On Sunday, August 3, 2014 11:32:43 PM UTC+5:30, Thejesh GN wrote: Actually its not a bad idea to list it on the wiki. Let me know i will create an account. -- Thejesh GN ⏚ ತೇಜೇಶ್ ಜಿ.ಎನ್ http://thejeshgn.com GPG ID : 0xBFFC8DD3C06DD6B0 On Aug 3, 2014 10:15 PM, Sharad Lele shara...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Dilip and others: I have been following this thread with interest, but to be honest am a bit lost now. Can someone post a summary of which maps mentioned so far have what features (which coverage, pertaining to which year, what attributes (such as census codes), etc.)? Would be most helpful. Sharad On Friday, August 1, 2014 9:03:58 PM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: Hello, This is an old post. However this is the appropriate place to add an additional source. I had downloaded the set from Grid Geneva many years ago. The original complete source was named as GNV197 which is 24 MB Titled as HUMAN POPULATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES DATABASE FOR ASIA I am attaching the South Central Asia E00 file. That set contains The disputed areas under the country name IN1 and IN2 This dataset can not be easily found at present on the GRID Geneva site http://www.grid.unep.ch/index.php?lang=en in the same name. may be it is still there somewhere with some other name. For copyright check the
Re: [datameet] Re: Shapefiles for complete India
This is very interesting Sharad. I've been looking for maps of what I've been calling administrative blocks, that is, the units overseen by block development officers. MGNREGA data is aggregated at this level and I've been hoping to use the data to do some mapping exercises. The census sub-districts are called differently across states (tahsil, taluk, mandal, etc). You can see the list here: http://censusindia.gov.in/Tables_Published/Admin_Units/Admin_links/subdistrict_nomeclature.html I know that in all the states where census sub-districts are called taluk, mandal, or CD block (with the exception of TN), the census sub-district is identical to the administrative block. I've already completed a mapping exercise for Bihar using the census sub-district map and the data matched up pretty well. If the IND_adm3 data is indeed the administrative blocks then I could do a similar exercise with Madhya Pradesh. I'll take a look to see if the data lines up correctly. Has anybody dug into this issue any deeper? I've heard that tehsil comes from the revenue side whereas taluk, mandal, etc comes from the administrative side but that doesn't explain why the census uses different sub-district units across states. Best, Eric On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Sharad Lele sharad.l...@gmail.com wrote: If I am right, then Justin may want to rename his layer as CDBlocks_2001... Sharad On Thursday, August 7, 2014 4:28:17 PM UTC+5:30, Sharad Lele wrote: I think I have the explanation for why I am seeing a good match and you are not: The problem lies in defining what is the 'sub-district' unit (in IND_adm3). Administratively speaking, it is tehsil, below which lies CD block. Unfortunately, census gives information by CD block. So there are more 'sub-district' units in Census than tehsils in the country. GDAM seems to have followed the tehsil concept. To check: Karnataka is one state in which tehsil and CD block are one and the same. That is why the sub-district layer IND_adm3 matches perfectly for Karnataka, but not for other states. There might be some other states where this holds good, I don't know. Anyway, so if one really wants CD block level boundaries, we have to look at Justin, I guess. But the GDAM boundaries are not 'wrong'. Sharad On 07-Aug-14 9:48 AM, Devdatta Tengshe wrote: In Continuation of my previous email, here is a CSV file which shows just how bad the GDAM dataset is. Regards, Devdatta On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Devdatta Tengshe devda...@tengshe.in wrote: Hi Sharad, I just download the GDAM data again, to confirm what you have said. I'm going to have to disagree with you about the quality of the IND_adm3 data. Acoording to the 2001 Census, there are 5454 Sub Districts in India http://www.socialjustice.nic.in/pdf/tab11.pdf. The GDAM dataset has just 2299 features. So clearly these taluk features do not correspond to the 2001 Census. I cross checked for some areas I have ground knowledge of, and I can say that this dataset is not from any specific era. Some tehsils in the file were created post 2001, while others created in the 90's were not present. In my opinion the GDAM data is pretty much unusable. Regards, Devdatta On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Sharad Lele sharad.l...@gmail.com wrote: I have downloaded and checked the GADM boundaries (my version is 2011). The taluka boundary layer probably holds good today, becuase few talukas get split. Districts get split regularly (every so many years) so the district boundary layer in this GADM set is quite of date (may apply to 2001 or so). The spatial registration (positional accuracy is ~1km, and the spatial detail is of course not as good as the boundaries given in a Survey of India 50k topo, but then that is an unfair standard, so by a more generalized standard, the quality is okay. Sharad On Monday, August 4, 2014 7:20:38 PM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: Mr Thakkar, Please also look at another post (more than one) on this group about Taluk Shapefiles by Justin Meyers So far as I know GADM is the source that has Taluk files. I am not sure about its completeness and accuracy as on today http://www.gadm.org/ On Monday, August 4, 2014 6:23:07 PM UTC+5:30, D Thakker wrote: thanks Dilip for your hardwork. I have been on a lookout for all taluka / tehsil shape file, so how do I be in a loop as I am very keen to see the repository mail / list. On Monday, August 4, 2014 9:50:26 AM UTC+5:30, Dilip Damle wrote: Sharad, I am working on some things will revert in about a week or may be more. Thejesh, Go ahead, Actually there was one more source a Low Resolution (vertices) District map by VDS technologies. I have it as Polylines in Autocad. I seem to have lost the original file. If anyone has then please share it. (it does not seem to be on their site now) On Sunday, August 3, 2014 11:32:43 PM UTC+5:30, Thejesh GN wrote: Actually its not
Re: [datameet] Re: Shapefiles for complete India
On 07-Aug-14 8:18 PM, Justin Meyers wrote: As per our conversation yesterday, could you upload your data? You keep criticizing everyone else's data, but you don't share your own!?? Help me help you :) Dear Justin: I think you are going too far and too fast. A more moderate tone would be appreciated. 1. I never criticized anyone: in fact, i said GDAM was ok, and you were the one who used fairly strong words against it. 2. I have only clarified out that your layer reflects CD block boundaries while GDAM reflects tehsil boundaries. Both may be 'ok' in what they represent. 3. The only reason I have not shared any data of mine is simply because I have only two datasets: the GDAM one (which is both already available and being criticised by some ;-)) and a dataset of admin boundaries (district and tehsil) for Karnataka state alone which we paid for and got digitized from District Census Handbooks of 1991. When I check GDAM or your layer versus this layer, I see no major differences. So then what is the point in uploading that data? Sharad -- Democratizing Forest Governance in India (In press with Oxford University Press India) -- Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more about us by visiting http://datameet.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups datameet group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to datameet+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [datameet] [Bangalore] Monthly working
I am in. I love small and targeted meetups/hackathons. Thej -- Thejesh GN *⏚* ತೇಜೇಶ್ ಜಿ.ಎನ್ http://thejeshgn.com GPG ID : 0xBFFC8DD3C06DD6B0 On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Devdatta Tengshe devda...@tengshe.in wrote: Hi Nisha, I think that this is an excellent idea. Very often I am doing some tinkering along these lines on my own, but a hackathon kind of atmosphere is more conducive to doing these things quickly. I'm all in. Regards, Devdatta Tengshe On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Nisha Thompson ni...@datameet.org wrote: Hey Everyone, Based on some conversations at the last Bangalore Meet up it seems there is some interest in getting together to do some mini working sessions (hackathons) to get and clean data. Something like we did before the Bangalore Open Data Camp around PDFs and QGIS. 2 to 4 hours where people can work on helping get data out of websites, pdfs, clean up data or learn or trouble shoot. We can pick a Saturday or Sunday, have food provided and get some specific tasks from people who need help. Is this something people would like to try? Also this would be separate from the DataMeet ups which we would keep as talks or presentations. Nisha -- Nisha Thompson DataMeet.org ni...@datameet.org skype: nishaqt mobile: 962-061-2245 -- Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more about us by visiting http://datameet.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups datameet group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to datameet+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more about us by visiting http://datameet.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups datameet group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to datameet+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more about us by visiting http://datameet.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups datameet group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to datameet+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [datameet] Re: Shapefiles for complete India
Hello all, Nice enlightening discussion with a little sparks, A small thumbnail photo of the member may help reduce sparks because then you create an image of that person in your mind based on the photo. BTW my photo here is about 40 years outdated now I look more ferocious :) Any way to add to the confusion there is also the Division So it seems to be Country State Division District Tehsil / Taluk Some Kind of Block Village Let us first get this ans confirm if each is subset of the other or there are overlaps and if there is any other item missing in between then let us proceed On Thursday, August 7, 2014 10:32:08 PM UTC+5:30, Justin Meyers wrote: Sharad, Sorry about my tone; I get excited/ pushy when it comes to geospatial data. In my experience, you have to ask, ask again, and keep asking (like I did with you until you finally responded). I guess I should only ask once, and if you don't respond, then you never will... In my honest opinion, GADM is junk. If you want me to explain the top ten reasons why, I can. As per you sharing your data; if you can share it, it would be great. Digitized one off data is unique, and could be better than what is on this forum. If you or your company paid for the data, and cannot share, it makes sense. I figure since you are here, looking for free data (or whatever), asking questions about it, and have data, why not share what you have. Just my 2 cents. Sorry for coming off as a jerk. I apologize. Justin On Thursday, August 7, 2014 12:51:39 PM UTC-4, Sharad Lele wrote: On 07-Aug-14 8:18 PM, Justin Meyers wrote: As per our conversation yesterday, could you upload your data? You keep criticizing everyone else's data, but you don't share your own!?? Help me help you :) Dear Justin: I think you are going too far and too fast. A more moderate tone would be appreciated. 1. I never criticized anyone: in fact, i said GDAM was ok, and you were the one who used fairly strong words against it. 2. I have only clarified out that your layer reflects CD block boundaries while GDAM reflects tehsil boundaries. Both may be 'ok' in what they represent. 3. The only reason I have not shared any data of mine is simply because I have only two datasets: the GDAM one (which is both already available and being criticised by some ;-)) and a dataset of admin boundaries (district and tehsil) for Karnataka state alone which we paid for and got digitized from District Census Handbooks of 1991. When I check GDAM or your layer versus this layer, I see no major differences. So then what is the point in uploading that data? Sharad -- Democratizing Forest Governance in India (In press with Oxford University Press India) -- Datameet is a community of Data Science enthusiasts in India. Know more about us by visiting http://datameet.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups datameet group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to datameet+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
