Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Benoit Leseul]

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 20:27, Ben Laenen  wrote:
> Benoit Leseul wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:18, Luc Van den Troost  wrote:
>> > [...]
>> > Comunities are made up of people, not of area. So putting
>> > communitie-borders on the map is kind of insane.
>>
>> In terms of boundaries, the belgian constitution defines four
>> linguistic areas ("régions linguistiques"/"taalgebieden") but not
>> communities as geographical entities.
>>
>> See Art. 4 :
>> http://www.senate.be/doc/const_nl.html#t1
>> http://www.senate.be/doc/const_fr.html#t1
>> http://www.senate.be/deutsch/const_de.html#t1
>>
>> They are all contained into regional boundaries and are identical to
>> the regions except for the "deutsche Sprachgebiet".
>>
>> I think that's what should be mapped at that level (be it 4 or 5) and
>> it would solve the overlap problem.
>
> The idea was to map the communities according to those language areas. If
> everyone agrees to map these language areas instead of communities, fine by
> me, but I just thought it would be odd to see something like "région bilingue
> de Bruxelles-Capitale - tweetalige gebied Brussel-Hoofdstad" appear on the
> map,

Sure it's not pretty, but possibly less odd than overlapping areas and
bigger sublevels than their upper counterparts.
Maybe the name could be reduced to something like "Région de
Bruxelles-Capitale - Brussel-Hoofdstad" since the bilingual aspect can
be implied by the double name.

> and because it then looks like the maps you can find on
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communities,_regions_and_language_areas_of_Belgium
> which are the maps everyone learns it with at school as well.

That's probably an oversimplification, the maps are showing competence
areas, not areas per se.
Also, I don't know that any OSM renderer shows overlapping areas with
a hatched texture.

But yeah, "It's complicated" and I'm not sure everyone would agree one
way or another.
It will look strange and complex in both cases, but so is reality :)

-- 
Benoit

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Ben Laenen]

Benoit Leseul wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:18, Luc Van den Troost  wrote:
> > [...]
> > Comunities are made up of people, not of area. So putting
> > communitie-borders on the map is kind of insane.
> 
> In terms of boundaries, the belgian constitution defines four
> linguistic areas ("régions linguistiques"/"taalgebieden") but not
> communities as geographical entities.
> 
> See Art. 4 :
> http://www.senate.be/doc/const_nl.html#t1
> http://www.senate.be/doc/const_fr.html#t1
> http://www.senate.be/deutsch/const_de.html#t1
> 
> They are all contained into regional boundaries and are identical to
> the regions except for the "deutsche Sprachgebiet".
> 
> I think that's what should be mapped at that level (be it 4 or 5) and
> it would solve the overlap problem.

The idea was to map the communities according to those language areas. If 
everyone agrees to map these language areas instead of communities, fine by 
me, but I just thought it would be odd to see something like "région bilingue 
de Bruxelles-Capitale - tweetalige gebied Brussel-Hoofdstad" appear on the 
map, and because it then looks like the maps you can find on 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communities,_regions_and_language_areas_of_Belgium 
which are the maps everyone learns it with at school as well.

Greetings
Ben

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Ben Laenen]

Maarten Deen wrote:
> Then why is this information not on the international page?

Because someone ("Loll78") changed the correct entities in the table last 
January and because I'm not checking each wiki edit?


> There is
> absolutely no reason to have conflicting information on a wiki.
> In this list I am missing single towns. A municipality consists of
> multiple towns. Should it not be: municipality:8, town:9,
> district/deelgemeentes/sections:10?

I have no idea what the concept of a "town" would be in Belgium.


> I assume 10 can be used for sububurbs/wijken too? (does Belgium have
> that concept like the Netherlands?)

Yeah, there is a concept like it in some places, but it's not strictly defined 
as far as I know. Nevertheless I kept the admin_level 10 open for it. I don't 
think there's a level 10 boundary mapped in OSM in Belgium.


> > I've just spent some time yesterday fixing numerous borders in
> > Wallonia which were tagged incorrectly...
> 
> That would probably have been avoided if the international page had
> shown the same information as the national one.

As said, it had the correct info until someone changed it for some reason. And 
if I remember correctly, it's the same person who wrongly mapped those 
boundaries.

Greetings
Ben

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Julien Fastré]

I think there were no rules about how the old gemeente/commune were joined
together. It was done with taking into account cultural, political, and
financial arguments.

I think there is no differienciation between gemeente/commune and
city/town/ville/stad. A city/stad/ville in Belgium is a gemeente/commune
with some distinction, but there is no legal diffecientation between them.
In consequence, I don't see why we shoud use the admin_level=town.

Deelgemeenten and disctrict are used in Antwerp, in Liege there is also some
differenciation for the organisation inside the commune/gemeente (CPAS,
service population/dienst bevolking, ...). Wijk/quartier seem more informal:
I also wonder if this is really an "administrative border".

I also suggest that we vote for such proposition... I think it makes sense
in the life of the community, because this is a topic were we could discuss
a lot...

Julien



2011/6/8 Maarten Deen 

> On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 12:10:17 +0200, Julien Fastré wrote:
>
>> What are "towns" and "suburbs" in Belgium ?
>>
>> In Liège, as far as I know, old communes are now the name of some
>> "quartiers" (i do not know the word in english). If I would map them,
>> I would use the disctrict/deelgemeentes/section level... But maybe I
>> am wrong...
>>
>
> Looking a bit further, it could be that in Belgium towns are synonymous
> with deelgemeentes. At least when I look at <
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_gemeenten_in_het_Vlaams_Gewest>.
>
> This would suggest that before the communal reshufflings in 1960-1970, a
> gemeente/commune would only consist of one town. Is that true?
> That's a bit different from the Netherlands where there were (also in the
> past) almost always more than one town in a gemeente.
> And then the info in the belgian page (which I have also put on the global
> page) would be complete.
>
> Maarten
>
>
>  2011/6/8 Maarten Deen
>>
>>  On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:22:28 +0200, Andre Engels wrote:
>>>
>>>  On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Maarten Deen wrote:

  Don't have much time to reply, so a short one:
>>
>> Always look at the country specific page to get the answers.
>> The
>> international
>> page is just there for some "guiding", but the countries
>> have to make
>> their
>> own rules. As is the case for Belgium.
>>
>> country: level 2
>> regions: level 4
>> communities: level 5
>> provinces: level 6
>> arrondissements: level 7
>> municipalities: level 8
>> district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 9
>>
>
> Then why is this information not on the international page?
> There is
> absolutely no reason to have conflicting information on a
> wiki.
> In this list I am missing single towns. A municipality
> consists of multiple
> towns. Should it not be: municipality:8, town:9,
> district/deelgemeentes/sections:10?
> I assume 10 can be used for sububurbs/wijken too? (does
> Belgium have that
> concept like the Netherlands?)
>

 'Deelgemeente' in Belgium is a different concept than in the
 Netherlands. They are former municipalities, which in the 1960s
 or
 1970s have fused into larger municipalities. Thus, a
 deelgemeente/district/section is more like a town than like a
 wijk.

>>>
>>> Ok, I've also looked at wikipedia, to me it seems that from low
>>> admin_level to high it should be:
>>> - Municipality (Gemeente/Commune)
>>> - Deelgemeente/district
>>> - Town
>>> - Suburb (Wijk)
>>>
>>> That would then suggest that everything from region down should be
>>> dropped one admin_level:
>>>
>>> country: level 2
>>> regions: level 3
>>> communities: level 4
>>> provinces: level 5
>>> arrondissements: level 6
>>> municipalities: level 7
>>> district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 8
>>> town: level 9
>>> suburb: level 10
>>>
>>> Or start using admin_level=11.
>>>
>>> Maarten
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-be mailing list
>>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org [2]
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be [3]
>>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>



-- 
Julien FASTRE
http://www.meta-morphoses.be
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Maarten Deen]

On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 12:10:17 +0200, Julien Fastré wrote:

What are "towns" and "suburbs" in Belgium ?

In Liège, as far as I know, old communes are now the name of some
"quartiers" (i do not know the word in english). If I would map them,
I would use the disctrict/deelgemeentes/section level... But maybe I
am wrong...


Looking a bit further, it could be that in Belgium towns are synonymous 
with deelgemeentes. At least when I look at 
.


This would suggest that before the communal reshufflings in 1960-1970, 
a gemeente/commune would only consist of one town. Is that true?
That's a bit different from the Netherlands where there were (also in 
the past) almost always more than one town in a gemeente.
And then the info in the belgian page (which I have also put on the 
global page) would be complete.


Maarten



2011/6/8 Maarten Deen


On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:22:28 +0200, Andre Engels wrote:


On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Maarten Deen wrote:


Don't have much time to reply, so a short one:

Always look at the country specific page to get the answers.
The
international
page is just there for some "guiding", but the countries
have to make
their
own rules. As is the case for Belgium.

country: level 2
regions: level 4
communities: level 5
provinces: level 6
arrondissements: level 7
municipalities: level 8
district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 9


Then why is this information not on the international page?
There is
absolutely no reason to have conflicting information on a
wiki.
In this list I am missing single towns. A municipality
consists of multiple
towns. Should it not be: municipality:8, town:9,
district/deelgemeentes/sections:10?
I assume 10 can be used for sububurbs/wijken too? (does
Belgium have that
concept like the Netherlands?)


'Deelgemeente' in Belgium is a different concept than in the
Netherlands. They are former municipalities, which in the 1960s
or
1970s have fused into larger municipalities. Thus, a
deelgemeente/district/section is more like a town than like a
wijk.


Ok, I've also looked at wikipedia, to me it seems that from low
admin_level to high it should be:
- Municipality (Gemeente/Commune)
- Deelgemeente/district
- Town
- Suburb (Wijk)

That would then suggest that everything from region down should be
dropped one admin_level:

country: level 2
regions: level 3
communities: level 4
provinces: level 5
arrondissements: level 6
municipalities: level 7
district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 8
town: level 9
suburb: level 10

Or start using admin_level=11.

Maarten

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org [2]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be [3]



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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Julien Fastré]

What are "towns" and "suburbs" in Belgium ?

In Liège, as far as I know, old communes are now the name of some
"quartiers" (i do not know the word in english). If I would map them, I
would use the disctrict/deelgemeentes/section level... But maybe I am
wrong...

But I do not know about any examples of town or suburb...

I do not understand also the link between the tag place=* and admin_level=*.
I think that, in Belgium, we should have to set a place "town" inside a
admin_level "municipalities" because there isn't any official "town"...

For instance: create a relation "boundary=administrative +
admin_level=(municipalities: 7 or 8)" and, inside, a "place=city" if it is
more than 100.000 inhabitants, "place=town" if the municipality counts
between 10.000 and 100.000 inhabitants, ...

But this is a bit unclear for me...
Julien

2011/6/8 Maarten Deen 

> On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:22:28 +0200, Andre Engels wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Maarten Deen  wrote:
>>
>>  Don't have much time to reply, so a short one:

 Always look at the country specific page to get the answers. The
 international
 page is just there for some "guiding", but the countries have to make
 their
 own rules. As is the case for Belgium.

 country: level 2
 regions: level 4
 communities: level 5
 provinces: level 6
 arrondissements: level 7
 municipalities: level 8
 district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 9

>>>
>>> Then why is this information not on the international page? There is
>>> absolutely no reason to have conflicting information on a wiki.
>>> In this list I am missing single towns. A municipality consists of
>>> multiple
>>> towns. Should it not be: municipality:8, town:9,
>>> district/deelgemeentes/sections:10?
>>> I assume 10 can be used for sububurbs/wijken too? (does Belgium have that
>>> concept like the Netherlands?)
>>>
>>
>> 'Deelgemeente' in Belgium is a different concept than in the
>> Netherlands. They are former municipalities, which in the 1960s or
>> 1970s have fused into larger municipalities. Thus, a
>> deelgemeente/district/section is more like a town than like a wijk.
>>
>
> Ok, I've also looked at wikipedia, to me it seems that from low admin_level
> to high it should be:
> - Municipality (Gemeente/Commune)
> - Deelgemeente/district
> - Town
> - Suburb (Wijk)
>
> That would then suggest that everything from region down should be dropped
> one admin_level:
>
> country: level 2
> regions: level 3
> communities: level 4
> provinces: level 5
> arrondissements: level 6
> municipalities: level 7
> district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 8
> town: level 9
> suburb: level 10
>
> Or start using admin_level=11.
>
> Maarten
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>



-- 
Julien FASTRE
http://www.meta-morphoses.be
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Benoit Leseul]

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:18, Luc Van den Troost  wrote:
> [...]
> Comunities are made up of people, not of area. So putting
> communitie-borders on the map is kind of insane.

In terms of boundaries, the belgian constitution defines four
linguistic areas ("régions linguistiques"/"taalgebieden") but not
communities as geographical entities.

See Art. 4 :
http://www.senate.be/doc/const_nl.html#t1
http://www.senate.be/doc/const_fr.html#t1
http://www.senate.be/deutsch/const_de.html#t1

They are all contained into regional boundaries and are identical to
the regions except for the "deutsche Sprachgebiet".

I think that's what should be mapped at that level (be it 4 or 5) and
it would solve the overlap problem.

-- 
Benoit

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Maarten Deen]

On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:22:28 +0200, Andre Engels wrote:
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Maarten Deen  
wrote:



Don't have much time to reply, so a short one:

Always look at the country specific page to get the answers. The
international
page is just there for some "guiding", but the countries have to 
make

their
own rules. As is the case for Belgium.

country: level 2
regions: level 4
communities: level 5
provinces: level 6
arrondissements: level 7
municipalities: level 8
district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 9


Then why is this information not on the international page? There is
absolutely no reason to have conflicting information on a wiki.
In this list I am missing single towns. A municipality consists of 
multiple

towns. Should it not be: municipality:8, town:9,
district/deelgemeentes/sections:10?
I assume 10 can be used for sububurbs/wijken too? (does Belgium have 
that

concept like the Netherlands?)


'Deelgemeente' in Belgium is a different concept than in the
Netherlands. They are former municipalities, which in the 1960s or
1970s have fused into larger municipalities. Thus, a
deelgemeente/district/section is more like a town than like a wijk.


Ok, I've also looked at wikipedia, to me it seems that from low 
admin_level to high it should be:

- Municipality (Gemeente/Commune)
- Deelgemeente/district
- Town
- Suburb (Wijk)

That would then suggest that everything from region down should be 
dropped one admin_level:


country: level 2
regions: level 3
communities: level 4
provinces: level 5
arrondissements: level 6
municipalities: level 7
district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 8
town: level 9
suburb: level 10

Or start using admin_level=11.

Maarten



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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Andre Engels]

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Maarten Deen  wrote:

>> Don't have much time to reply, so a short one:
>>
>> Always look at the country specific page to get the answers. The
>> international
>> page is just there for some "guiding", but the countries have to make
>> their
>> own rules. As is the case for Belgium.
>>
>> country: level 2
>> regions: level 4
>> communities: level 5
>> provinces: level 6
>> arrondissements: level 7
>> municipalities: level 8
>> district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 9
>
> Then why is this information not on the international page? There is
> absolutely no reason to have conflicting information on a wiki.
> In this list I am missing single towns. A municipality consists of multiple
> towns. Should it not be: municipality:8, town:9,
> district/deelgemeentes/sections:10?
> I assume 10 can be used for sububurbs/wijken too? (does Belgium have that
> concept like the Netherlands?)

'Deelgemeente' in Belgium is a different concept than in the
Netherlands. They are former municipalities, which in the 1960s or
1970s have fused into larger municipalities. Thus, a
deelgemeente/district/section is more like a town than like a wijk.


-- 
André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Luc Van den Troost]

Hi,

I made the same remark as Ralf about the 'level 5 - comunities'
borders some years ago, but at that time I got the impression it 'is
not something you should discuss about'...

Comunities are made up of people, not of area. So putting
communitie-borders on the map is kind of insane.

Just didn't want to start a civil- or mapping war about that at that
time, don't even know if a discussion about that on a Belgian forum is
possible at all.

Do you want to put a level 5 border around a Flemish school in
Brussels, or around a French speaking school in the
'faciliteitengemeenten'? A moving border if a Flemish class visits the
cascades of coo?

Luc / Speedy

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Ben Laenen  wrote:
> Ralf Hermanns wrote:
>> I think there is conflicting information here:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative and here:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Boundaries
>>
>> On the Tag:boundary=administrative page (first link) it says
>> communities/provinces go on level 5 and arrondisments on 6 - while on the
>> subproject page it only list the language communites on level 5 and puts
>> provinces onto 6 (thereby moving arrondisments and towns further down)
>
> Don't have much time to reply, so a short one:
>
> Always look at the country specific page to get the answers. The international
> page is just there for some "guiding", but the countries have to make their
> own rules. As is the case for Belgium.
>
> country: level 2
> regions: level 4
> communities: level 5
> provinces: level 6
> arrondissements: level 7
> municipalities: level 8
> district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 9
>
> I've just spent some time yesterday fixing numerous borders in Wallonia which
> were tagged incorrectly...
>
> Greetings
> Ben
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Maarten Deen]

On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:04:56 +0200, Ben Laenen wrote:

Ralf Hermanns wrote:

I think there is conflicting information here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative and 
here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Boundaries

On the Tag:boundary=administrative page (first link) it says
communities/provinces go on level 5 and arrondisments on 6 - while 
on the
subproject page it only list the language communites on level 5 and 
puts
provinces onto 6 (thereby moving arrondisments and towns further 
down)


Don't have much time to reply, so a short one:

Always look at the country specific page to get the answers. The
international
page is just there for some "guiding", but the countries have to make 
their

own rules. As is the case for Belgium.

country: level 2
regions: level 4
communities: level 5
provinces: level 6
arrondissements: level 7
municipalities: level 8
district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 9


Then why is this information not on the international page? There is 
absolutely no reason to have conflicting information on a wiki.
In this list I am missing single towns. A municipality consists of 
multiple towns. Should it not be: municipality:8, town:9, 
district/deelgemeentes/sections:10?
I assume 10 can be used for sububurbs/wijken too? (does Belgium have 
that concept like the Netherlands?)



I've just spent some time yesterday fixing numerous borders in
Wallonia which were tagged incorrectly...


That would probably have been avoided if the international page had 
shown the same information as the national one.


Maarten

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Ben Laenen]

Ralf Hermanns wrote:
> I think there is conflicting information here:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative and here:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Boundaries
> 
> On the Tag:boundary=administrative page (first link) it says
> communities/provinces go on level 5 and arrondisments on 6 - while on the
> subproject page it only list the language communites on level 5 and puts
> provinces onto 6 (thereby moving arrondisments and towns further down)

Don't have much time to reply, so a short one:

Always look at the country specific page to get the answers. The international 
page is just there for some "guiding", but the countries have to make their 
own rules. As is the case for Belgium.

country: level 2
regions: level 4
communities: level 5
provinces: level 6
arrondissements: level 7
municipalities: level 8
district/deelgemeentes/sections: level 9

I've just spent some time yesterday fixing numerous borders in Wallonia which 
were tagged incorrectly...

Greetings
Ben



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

[OSM-talk-be] Fixing administrative borders

[Ralf Hermanns]

Hello,

thanks to all for the great work on the OSM map in general and the Belgium data 
in special.
I did already benefit a lot from the work done, and I'd like to contribute to 
this great project too, but I am unsure how.

At the moment I am most interested in getting the borders for administrative 
units, from the country as whole down to towns and communes, for Belgium 
straightened out (=relations tagged with boundaries=administrative and 
admin_level=2-10)

I think there is conflicting information here: 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative
and here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Boundaries

On the Tag:boundary=administrative page (first link) it says 
communities/provinces go on level 5 and arrondisments on 6 - while on the 
subproject page it only list the language communites on level 5 and puts 
provinces onto 6 (thereby moving arrondisments and towns further down)

I am not sure which page describes the better solution and what way I need to 
look at data now.
I'd like to fix the "old" data to match "new" level guide, but I am afraid of 
touching anything until I know which way is the "right" one and which one is 
the "wrong" version!


My personal opinion (just my private thoughts at the moment) would be that only 
provinces should be on level 5 (as the tag:boundary page describes)

I would move the language-based communites out of the admin_level-tagged 
hierarchy completly and also not use boundary=administrative (can we use 
boundary=language or something?)


My reasons for this is that the language communites are not administrative 
borders (or are they? Please correct me if I am wrong here, no expert at all 
with this), but my even stronger point is that you got overlapping and 
"growing" areas while going down the hierarchy:

For example the relation http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/78967 
(french speaking community) is tagged as admin_level 5, and it includes the 
brussels area (because it is bi-lingual), while the relation "above" 
(admin_level 4) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/90348 (the Walloon 
Region) does not include Brussels (as it is it's own region). The "area" grows 
bigger while moving down hierarchy levels.
The same of course happens if you see it from the flemish speaking community on 
level 5 against the Flemish region on level 4.


The french speaking community also completly overlaps the german language 
community in east Belgium (my home place). This is technically absolutely 
correct, both language do co-exists here, but in terms of tagging 
administrative boundaries there should be no overlapping in my eyes - but 
again, not sure about this either.


I know that language is a delicate topic with Belgium currently, so please do 
not feel offended, let's try to discuss and find a solution for everybody, ok?

Thanks!
Ralf

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