Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
From: William Rieck [mailto:bi...@thinkers.org] Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 9:10 AM Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? Hi Paul, I was following your message until this statement, where I got confused. Are you saying the city of Langley is not a city? What do you mean by in British English? That's all fairly simple, but the place node is more complicated. Langley is not a city in British English, but a town. British English, as opposed to Canadian English or American English. OSM uses British English Using a simpler example, Burnaby does not meet the British English definition of a city, but Vancouver does. Burnaby is a town. An incorporated area is not necessarily a city. http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2Database=wnQuery=city includes two definitions of city: n 1: a large and densely populated urban area; may include several independent administrative districts; Ancient Troy was a great city [syn: city, metropolis, urban center] 2: an incorporated administrative district established by state charter; the city raised the tax rate OSM is closer to the first definition. Historically a city was the see of a bishop, but that no longer holds. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
Ive added the place node to both relations after discussions with Nominatim experts. Its a bit strange, but so is the situation. It seems to fix the queries you gave. From: Pierre Béland [mailto:pierz...@yahoo.fr] Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 7:52 PM To: Pierre Béland; William Rieck; Paul Norman Cc: talk-ca Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? Oups I was wrong in identifiying the polygons in JOSM. These are two adjacent polygons, the city being surrounded by the township. The difference in spelling comes from the alt_name=Langley. I should have mapped for the Night of the living map instead. Or maybe not! Pierre _ De : Pierre Béland pierz...@yahoo.fr À : William Rieck bi...@thinkers.org; Paul Norman penor...@mac.com Cc : talk-ca talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : Vendredi 21 février 2014 21h53 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? Looking at the Township and City of Langley, I see that these relations are duplicate polygons that share the exact same nodes. Then why two relations? Instead, would it be better to simply use alt_name for the city, added to the Township of Langley. Such Classification where you have two admin_level=8 for the same area is a nonsense to my point of view. To show the inconsistencies that this creates, let's have a look at the Nominatim links below. You will see how the Locality, Suburb, Residential highways etc. are shared between the two. And most of the item are classified under the Township. Some other elements under the City. But searching Nominatims, you will see places classified either und the Township, the City of simply Langley. For example, if you search in Nominatim for * Livingstone, Langley. Canada, this will be reported as Livingstone, Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, British-Columbia, Canada * 10 Avenue, Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada * Brookswood, Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada * 201A Street, Brookswood, Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada The best seems to make a choice for which locality title will be showed to describe Langley and use an alt_name tag to describe the second appellation * City Boundary Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031947 http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031947 http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=9164399767 * City Boundary City of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031946 http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031946 http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=98083231 Pierre _ De : William Rieck bi...@thinkers.org À : Paul Norman penor...@mac.com Cc : talk-ca talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : Vendredi 21 février 2014 12h09 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? Hi Paul, I was following your message until this statement, where I got confused. Are you saying the city of Langley is not a city? What do you mean by in British English? That's all fairly simple, but the place node is more complicated. Langley is not a city in British English, but a town. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
Hi Paul, I was following your message until this statement, where I got confused. Are you saying the city of Langley is not a city? What do you mean by in British English? That's all fairly simple, but the place node is more complicated. Langley is not a city in British English, but a town. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
Looking at the Township and City of Langley, I see that these relations are duplicate polygons that share the exact same nodes. Then why two relations? Instead, would it be better to simply use alt_name for the city, added to the Township of Langley. Such Classification where you have two admin_level=8 for the same area is a nonsense to my point of view. To show the inconsistencies that this creates, let's have a look at the Nominatim links below. You will see how the Locality, Suburb, Residential highways etc. are shared between the two. And most of the item are classified under the Township. Some other elements under the City. But searching Nominatims, you will see places classified either und the Township, the City of simply Langley. For example, if you search in Nominatim for * Livingstone, Langley. Canada, this will be reported as Livingstone, Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, British-Columbia, Canada * 10 Avenue, Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada * Brookswood, Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada * 201A Street, Brookswood, Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada The best seems to make a choice for which locality title will be showed to describe Langley and use an alt_name tag to describe the second appellation * City Boundary Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031947 http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=9164399767 * City Boundary City of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031946 http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=98083231 Pierre De : William Rieck bi...@thinkers.org À : Paul Norman penor...@mac.com Cc : talk-ca talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : Vendredi 21 février 2014 12h09 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? Hi Paul, I was following your message until this statement, where I got confused. Are you saying the city of Langley is not a city? What do you mean by in British English? That's all fairly simple, but the place node is more complicated. Langley is not a city in British English, but a town. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
Oups I was wrong in identifiying the polygons in JOSM. These are two adjacent polygons, the city being surrounded by the township. The difference in spelling comes from the alt_name=Langley. I should have mapped for the Night of the living map instead. Or maybe not! Pierre De : Pierre Béland pierz...@yahoo.fr À : William Rieck bi...@thinkers.org; Paul Norman penor...@mac.com Cc : talk-ca talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : Vendredi 21 février 2014 21h53 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? Looking at the Township and City of Langley, I see that these relations are duplicate polygons that share the exact same nodes. Then why two relations? Instead, would it be better to simply use alt_name for the city, added to the Township of Langley. Such Classification where you have two admin_level=8 for the same area is a nonsense to my point of view. To show the inconsistencies that this creates, let's have a look at the Nominatim links below. You will see how the Locality, Suburb, Residential highways etc. are shared between the two. And most of the item are classified under the Township. Some other elements under the City. But searching Nominatims, you will see places classified either und the Township, the City of simply Langley. For example, if you search in Nominatim for * Livingstone, Langley. Canada, this will be reported as Livingstone, Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, British-Columbia, Canada * 10 Avenue, Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada * Brookswood, Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada * 201A Street, Brookswood, Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada The best seems to make a choice for which locality title will be showed to describe Langley and use an alt_name tag to describe the second appellation * City Boundary Township of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031947 http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=9164399767 * City Boundary City of Langley, Greater Vancouver Regional District, Colombie-Britannique, Canada http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031946 http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=98083231 Pierre De : William Rieck bi...@thinkers.org À : Paul Norman penor...@mac.com Cc : talk-ca talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : Vendredi 21 février 2014 12h09 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? Hi Paul, I was following your message until this statement, where I got confused. Are you saying the city of Langley is not a city? What do you mean by in British English? That's all fairly simple, but the place node is more complicated. Langley is not a city in British English, but a town. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
From: Daniel Friesen [mailto:dan...@nadir-seen-fire.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 3:10 AM To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? I'm a little new to OSM, recently I found that neither of the city boundaries for the Langley area showed up in searches for Langley. The issue was that neither had any type of name entry with just Langley I added an alt_name=Langley to both of the boundaries myself: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031946 (City of Langley) http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031947 (Township of Langley) I think it's reasonable. Langley could refer to either, but it's not the official name of either, or the less formal name they commonly use. alt_name sounds suitable. For those who aren't local - Both the City and Township are incorporated municipalities in local terms, which maps to admin_level=8 - They are adjacent, but do not intersect, nor are they within each other. - The Township is much larger, and has open data. The City is smaller, and has GIS department consisting of one person. - There is often no distinction between the two, and their addresses are on a grid layout That's all fairly simple, but the place node is more complicated. Langley is not a city in British English, but a town. However, I'm not sure that its place=town node can be tied solely to the admin relation for one or the other. I'm not sure what to do, but one suggestion was to put it as the label of both. Label is a bit of a misnomer really - the only current function of it is to Indicate that the place node and admin boundary somewhat refer to the same thing. It is not used by the standard stylesheet for rendering of administrative boundary labels, nor are there plans for it to be (https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/105) ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
I'm a little new to OSM, recently I found that neither of the city boundaries for the Langley area showed up in searches for Langley. The issue was that neither had any type of name entry with just Langley I added an alt_name=Langley to both of the boundaries myself: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031946 (City of Langley) http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031947 (Township of Langley) I was wondering if alt_name was the correct one to use for this. How to organize naming tags seems to be a regional thing. Also when I brought this up in other channels it was recommended that I add the Langley place node (http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/52555902) as a 'label' member to the relevant city border. However when I look around at other cities like Surrey and Vancouver I do not see this relation setup elsewhere. Thoughts? -- ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/] ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
I would do both, as you might be looking for the exact location or the municipal border. Corey On Feb 19, 2014 3:10 AM, Daniel Friesen dan...@nadir-seen-fire.com wrote: I'm a little new to OSM, recently I found that neither of the city boundaries for the Langley area showed up in searches for Langley. The issue was that neither had any type of name entry with just Langley I added an alt_name=Langley to both of the boundaries myself: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031946 (City of Langley) http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031947 (Township of Langley) I was wondering if alt_name was the correct one to use for this. How to organize naming tags seems to be a regional thing. Also when I brought this up in other channels it was recommended that I add the Langley place node (http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/52555902) as a 'label' member to the relevant city border. However when I look around at other cities like Surrey and Vancouver I do not see this relation setup elsewhere. Thoughts? -- ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/] ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
I see that both relations have the same classification admin_level=8. If these are simply to refer to alternate names, there should be only one relation with alternate names. Otherwise, if the City and the Township refer to different admin_levels, shoud the classification be revised ? Pierre De : Corey Burger corey.bur...@gmail.com À : Daniel Friesen dan...@nadir-seen-fire.com Cc : talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : Mercredi 19 février 2014 14h54 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? I would do both, as you might be looking for the exact location or the municipal border. Corey On Feb 19, 2014 3:10 AM, Daniel Friesen dan...@nadir-seen-fire.com wrote: I'm a little new to OSM, recently I found that neither of the city boundaries for the Langley area showed up in searches for Langley. The issue was that neither had any type of name entry with just Langley I added an alt_name=Langley to both of the boundaries myself: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031946 (City of Langley) http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031947 (Township of Langley) I was wondering if alt_name was the correct one to use for this. How to organize naming tags seems to be a regional thing. Also when I brought this up in other channels it was recommended that I add the Langley place node (http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/52555902) as a 'label' member to the relevant city border. However when I look around at other cities like Surrey and Vancouver I do not see this relation setup elsewhere. Thoughts? -- ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/] ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name?
The naming might be confusing to non BC resident, as both the City and Township are both municipalities under the regional government, unlike other places where a township is the regional level. Corey On Feb 19, 2014 12:42 PM, Pierre Béland pierz...@yahoo.fr wrote: I see that both relations have the same classification admin_level=8. If these are simply to refer to alternate names, there should be only one relation with alternate names. Otherwise, if the City and the Township refer to different admin_levels, shoud the classification be revised ? Pierre -- *De :* Corey Burger corey.bur...@gmail.com *À :* Daniel Friesen dan...@nadir-seen-fire.com *Cc :* talk-ca@openstreetmap.org *Envoyé le :* Mercredi 19 février 2014 14h54 *Objet :* Re: [Talk-ca] Updating Langley and use of alt_name? I would do both, as you might be looking for the exact location or the municipal border. Corey On Feb 19, 2014 3:10 AM, Daniel Friesen dan...@nadir-seen-fire.com wrote: I'm a little new to OSM, recently I found that neither of the city boundaries for the Langley area showed up in searches for Langley. The issue was that neither had any type of name entry with just Langley I added an alt_name=Langley to both of the boundaries myself: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031946 (City of Langley) http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2031947 (Township of Langley) I was wondering if alt_name was the correct one to use for this. How to organize naming tags seems to be a regional thing. Also when I brought this up in other channels it was recommended that I add the Langley place node (http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/52555902) as a 'label' member to the relevant city border. However when I look around at other cities like Surrey and Vancouver I do not see this relation setup elsewhere. Thoughts? -- ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/] ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
