This discussion, although amazingly lengthy is seeming useful. Someone
already explained that much of New England is different from most of the
United States in terms of not having unicorporated areas, and it might
help to explain details.
In Massachusetts, we have counties. Counties don't do
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 10/20/2010 03:14 PM, Anthony wrote:
Only in those 11 states, right?
I'm surprised admin level isn't already handled defined on a state by
state level.
Why treat it
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com writes:
Read the link you provided: In the remaining nine town or township
states (Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, and Wisconsin), there is no
geographic overlapping of these two
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
So if we have whole-multiple-counties=5 (eg
NYC) county=6 township=7 city/town=8 then it would make sense
everywhere.
What would be an example of a township that would be at admin_level=7?
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:29 AM,
Maine still has unincorporated cartesian townships with names like
Township 7 Range 4.
This is timber country with few permanent settlements.
A few have recieved names, likely by incorporation (idk).
iirc, in Maine the legal difference between town and city is as in
Mass from which it separated,
On 10/21/2010 08:06 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Greg Troxelg...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
So if we have whole-multiple-counties=5 (eg
NYC) county=6 township=7 city/town=8 then it would make sense
everywhere.
What would be an example of a township that would be at
On 10/21/2010 08:15 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:
Maine still has unincorporated cartesian townships with names like
Township 7 Range 4.
This is timber country with few permanent settlements.
A few have recieved names, likely by incorporation (idk).
From my quick understanding, those would be
Hello again everyone.
The last day of voting for the Social Facility proposal is tomorrow, 22 Oct.
The proposal can be found on the wiki here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/social_facility
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/social_facilityWith
13 votes,
Hello everyone!
From searching through the tagging mailing list archives, the Amenity key
has its share of supporters and detractors and the topic seems to frequently
rear its head. I can see both sides and like many of the tagging issues, it
comes down to semantics. I think a lot of the
Couple of thoughts
A) I agree/support it's not hierarchichal / A contains B but more whether A is
just larger than B, regardless of whether a particular B is fully contained
within, or reports to a particular B
B) i don't feel that any particular tag should necessarily have a global level
of
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 10/21/2010 08:06 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Greg Troxelg...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
So if we have whole-multiple-counties=5 (eg
NYC) county=6 township=7 city/town=8 then it would make sense
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Ant The Limey anttheli...@gmail.com wrote:
PS: I will buy beers at SOTM 2011 for anyone who can sing the Jibrovian
national anthem to me :)
That's one more beer for IvanSanchezOrtega.
___
Tagging mailing list
Anthony o...@inbox.org writes:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 10/21/2010 08:06 AM, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Greg Troxelg...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
So if we have whole-multiple-counties=5 (eg
NYC) county=6 township=7
Am 21.10.2010 23:29, schrieb Sean Horgan:
The definition of such a tag/key that is so common the database (3+%
according to taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.de/keys/amenity),
needs more than a single line definition.
Do you have a suggestion?
Peter
14 matches
Mail list logo
