Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
2014-05-14 4:51 GMT+02:00 Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com: For a long time I believed that the only practical reason for placing capital=yes or state_capital=yes on a node was to help the renderer decide how to render the label; the renderer could then avoid the trouble of handling relations, even though it's not tht hard to handle them, and a good renderer would have to handle them to support multipolygons anyway. It is a misconception to think either you support relations or you don't. The relation concept is very flexible and open, allowing to map all kind of relations between the member objects, which themselves could be other relations etc., this means you'll have to write different code for every type of relation (and often also for different ways of mapping the with the same type of relation, think nested relations for instance). If you support multipolygon relations (which are e.g. supported by osm2pgsql) this doesn't give you automagically support for admin_centre roles as well. I agree that it seems not too hard to support this particular role, but so far it simply isn't there (AFAIK, maybe you can do it with lua?). capital=yes btw. is the older concept, the admin_centre role and even the boundary relation itself (of not the datatype relation per se) are more recent. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Dear community, WTF? admin_level on place nodes surely duplicates admin_level tag value from one of relations which contain that node, but is that a bad thing? Did you try to calculate admin_level for a place in osm2pgsql database? I've spent two hours now trying to construct and optimize an SQL query for that, and seeing it takes at least 20 seconds for a tile, I'd prefer having admin_level tag on places. I know data users' problems are not mappers' problems, but why this rare redundancy is being addressed instead of other, like foot=yes with sidewalk=* (you can find thousand of other redundancies with taginfo)? Why did you after just two days of discussion started to remove this tags from nodes as important as GB's capital? Please explain why admin_level on place nodes harms the database, or refrain from removing it. Thanks. IZ I've added a note to the wiki to avoid future confusion: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Aboundary%3Dadministrativediff=1037547oldid=1000731 On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 6:30 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-05-11 3:50 GMT+02:00 Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com: Using admin_level outside (or without) a boundary=administrative relation will be as wrong/incomplete as using service without a highway=service, railway or waterway; or using crossing_ref without crossing, for example. +1 I'd also see it like this. Use the role admin_centre in administrative relations to include the central place, and/or add a capital=admin_level-number on the place object to store its administrative importance conveniently (no need to evaluate administrative relations or to inherit importance from a relation). IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Sorry, two facts that I forgot to check before sending the last mail. 1. There are 63762 place nodes with an admin_level in the database, and ~330k other nodes with this tag. I guess it's too late to forbid using the tag on nodes. 2. It's Berlin that was edited, not London: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22279835 Also, if we can remove a meaningful node just because it duplicates (and aggregates, but whatever) some other node in some other object after a small discussion among 10 people, does that mean that tags that have even less meaning considering data is usually loaded in a spatial database (like addr:city) can be removed on spot? IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
2014-05-13 14:20 GMT+02:00 Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru: admin_level on place nodes surely duplicates admin_level tag value from one of relations which contain that node, but is that a bad thing? Did you try to calculate admin_level for a place in osm2pgsql database? I've spent two hours now trying to construct and optimize an SQL query for that, and seeing it takes at least 20 seconds for a tile, I'd prefer having admin_level tag on places. admin_level has no real definition in the wiki what it is supposed to express: the key link redirects to boundary=administrative: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level This could already be taken as a statement: admin_level is there to express the admin_level of an administrative entity (this text is not there in the wiki right now). IMHO places are orthogonal to administrative entities. They can sometimes cover the same area, in other cases they don't. Some places are administrative centers for an administrative entity, others aren't. Now there is also a key capital that can tell the administrative importance for a place (it will contain the admin_level of the highest administrative entity (=lowest admin level number) for which a place is the administration centre), so no real need to have an admin_level with duplicating values on these places as well. I think capital is a better key for places then admin_level, as any place will have lots of admin_levels (e.g. 2 when it is inside a country) so semantically it doesn't make a lot of sense. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Martin Koppenhoefer: admin_level has no real definition in the wiki what it is supposed to express: the key link redirects to boundary=administrative: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level ... Now there is also a key capital that can tell the administrative importance for a place (it will contain the admin_level of the highest administrative entity (=lowest admin level number) for which a place is the administration centre), so no real need to have an admin_level with duplicating values on these places as well. I think capital is a better key for places then admin_level, as any place will have lots of admin_levels (e.g. 2 when it is inside a country) so semantically it doesn't make a lot of sense. First, this discussion it seemed was about removing admin_level tags, and not straightening up the tagging schema. I posted my reply because I had seen the tag removed from Berlin, not replaced by another. Left there is capital=yes tag, which is sometimes used along with admin_level=* ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:capital ). Having one tag instead of two to look at for admin_level value would be nice, but that should invoke some kind of a proposal (like when we [almost] bulk-replaced all building=entrance with entrance=yes). I'll support this decision no matter to which tag it comes to, capital or admin_level. But please, for now do not remove existing tags and do not put warnings in the wiki to not do something without providing a good alternative. IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
2014-05-13 15:02 GMT+02:00 Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru: First, this discussion it seemed was about removing admin_level tags, and not straightening up the tagging schema. I posted my reply because I had seen the tag removed from Berlin, not replaced by another. Left there is capital=yes tag, which is sometimes used along with admin_level=* ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:capital ). I am aware of that page (one hour ago reset it from cancelled to draft because capital as a key is not cancelled but well established). IMHO this proposal (and its discussion) doesn't advocate setting admin_level aside the capital tag. There was this idea back in 2008, but if you follow the discussion it looks as if capital is the key to go with (so no need for duplicating the same value in admin_level as well). Btw.: I completely agree with you that inheriting from administrative relations is worse than having an explicit tag on the place, as this inheritance idea doesn't work well with dynamic data (incremental updates and how they are usually applied, osm2pgsql). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
I surely could remove the warning I've added to the wiki, but please first consider that, from the ~33 nodes with a place=* tag that you mentioned, only 63762 (19%) are combined with an admin_level tag. I've mentioned [1] many of important cities (in fact, secondary, tertiary cities, right next to the capital city in a listing sorted by population) that do not have the admin_level tag. I'm being neutral in this debate, the only thing I care about is coming up with a reasonable recommendation for the Brazilian community. Add - and why - or not add - and why not. [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-May/017506.html On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru wrote: Martin Koppenhoefer: admin_level has no real definition in the wiki what it is supposed to express: the key link redirects to boundary=administrative: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level ... Now there is also a key capital that can tell the administrative importance for a place (it will contain the admin_level of the highest administrative entity (=lowest admin level number) for which a place is the administration centre), so no real need to have an admin_level with duplicating values on these places as well. I think capital is a better key for places then admin_level, as any place will have lots of admin_levels (e.g. 2 when it is inside a country) so semantically it doesn't make a lot of sense. First, this discussion it seemed was about removing admin_level tags, and not straightening up the tagging schema. I posted my reply because I had seen the tag removed from Berlin, not replaced by another. Left there is capital=yes tag, which is sometimes used along with admin_level=* ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:capital ). Having one tag instead of two to look at for admin_level value would be nice, but that should invoke some kind of a proposal (like when we [almost] bulk-replaced all building=entrance with entrance=yes). I'll support this decision no matter to which tag it comes to, capital or admin_level. But please, for now do not remove existing tags and do not put warnings in the wiki to not do something without providing a good alternative. IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 Nullius in verba. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Hi Martin, I was the one that marked the proposal for the key capital as cancelled (maybe abandoned was a better status). I did this because I saw it's use was a complete mess in tag info, and as far as I knew, admin_centre had the same purpose, so I just wanted to help to clean the wiki from it's countless inconsistencies and abandoned proposals. If the use of the key capital is well established, please at least create a page Key:capital explaining it's use. Em 13/05/2014 10:35, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com escreveu: 2014-05-13 15:02 GMT+02:00 Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru: First, this discussion it seemed was about removing admin_level tags, and not straightening up the tagging schema. I posted my reply because I had seen the tag removed from Berlin, not replaced by another. Left there is capital=yes tag, which is sometimes used along with admin_level=* ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:capital ). I am aware of that page (one hour ago reset it from cancelled to draft because capital as a key is not cancelled but well established). IMHO this proposal (and its discussion) doesn't advocate setting admin_level aside the capital tag. There was this idea back in 2008, but if you follow the discussion it looks as if capital is the key to go with (so no need for duplicating the same value in admin_level as well). Btw.: I completely agree with you that inheriting from administrative relations is worse than having an explicit tag on the place, as this inheritance idea doesn't work well with dynamic data (incremental updates and how they are usually applied, osm2pgsql). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
2014-05-13 16:54 GMT+02:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com: Hi Martin, I was the one that marked the proposal for the key capital as cancelled (maybe abandoned was a better status). I did this because I saw it's use was a complete mess in tag info, and as far as I knew, admin_centre had the same purpose, so I just wanted to help to clean the wiki from it's countless inconsistencies and abandoned proposals. If the use of the key capital is well established, please at least create a page Key:capital explaining it's use. You should be extra careful when marking docu as obsolete, I suggest always asking here before doing so. AFAIK that page is the only documentation for the capital key, and the capital-key is the mostly used and standard method to mark a country capital (there is also the newer method of adding the place with the admin centre role to the country's administrative relation, but commonly the renderers use the capital key). By looking at taginfo I don't agree that this tag looks messed up: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/capital#values there are very few values that don't fit into the definition(s) on the capital wiki page, county is the one with the most utilizations, but it's only 10 of them. You will have lots of strange values for all osm keys but as long as their number (for each value) is below 10 there is really no need to worry. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Hm, what does capital=8 mean? I've only seen the value capital=yes so far. It could be the result of a bad import. On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-05-13 16:54 GMT+02:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com: Hi Martin, I was the one that marked the proposal for the key capital as cancelled (maybe abandoned was a better status). I did this because I saw it's use was a complete mess in tag info, and as far as I knew, admin_centre had the same purpose, so I just wanted to help to clean the wiki from it's countless inconsistencies and abandoned proposals. If the use of the key capital is well established, please at least create a page Key:capital explaining it's use. You should be extra careful when marking docu as obsolete, I suggest always asking here before doing so. AFAIK that page is the only documentation for the capital key, and the capital-key is the mostly used and standard method to mark a country capital (there is also the newer method of adding the place with the admin centre role to the country's administrative relation, but commonly the renderers use the capital key). By looking at taginfo I don't agree that this tag looks messed up: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/capital#values there are very few values that don't fit into the definition(s) on the capital wiki page, county is the one with the most utilizations, but it's only 10 of them. You will have lots of strange values for all osm keys but as long as their number (for each value) is below 10 there is really no need to worry. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 Nullius in verba. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
2014-05-13 17:25 GMT+02:00 Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com: Hm, what does capital=8 mean? I've only seen the value capital=yes so far. It could be the result of a bad import. it generally means capital (or admin_centre) of an admin_level=8 entity. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
2014-05-13 17:24 GMT+02:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com: I still think it's needed to create a proper page for this key. I find it hard to see a proposal page with such a long discussion as some kind of standard. I agree that the docu could be better here, and it would certainly be a first step to move the discussion to the proposals discussion page (I have done this now and also added some notes on actual usage), but that doesn't void the proposal or the fact that this is a standard tag. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
I really don't think this is considered a standard tag by most people. In taginfo we can find keys like capital_city, capital_level, is_capital, state_capital, capital. As far as I saw, each key is concentrated on some parts of the globe. It certainly is not a fact that it is standard. I had changed the proposal status to cancelled because I thought the node admin_centre in the administrative relations superseded the proposal for the key capital, but it seems I was wrong. Anyway, I added a template to the page Key:capitalhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:capital . When people agree on a definition, we should add it to this page. 2014-05-13 12:45 GMT-03:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-05-13 17:24 GMT+02:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com: I still think it's needed to create a proper page for this key. I find it hard to see a proposal page with such a long discussion as some kind of standard. I agree that the docu could be better here, and it would certainly be a first step to move the discussion to the proposals discussion page (I have done this now and also added some notes on actual usage), but that doesn't void the proposal or the fact that this is a standard tag. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Am 13/mag/2014 um 19:06 schrieb John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com: It certainly is not a fact that it is standard. maybe you have to look how capitals are tagged and which of these tags are there for a long time, to be convinced? Are you aware that this key is in default.style? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Please explain why admin_level on place nodes harms the database, or refrain from removing it. Thanks. I actually put it back in Berlin after I took a 2nd closer look at Germany. Which then actually revealed that all our state capitals are tagged with admin_level=6 when they should be 4 as far as i understand if you tag them at all... Which then actually made me rethink and discover a possible problem when tagging the node. If you tag Berlin admin_level=2 do you assume it also holds admin_level=4? 6? (Then you realize that with Berlin you actually have a special situation, because it is a city state. But that wasn't even what I was going for.) Now let's say things in Germany would have went a bit different 20 years ago... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_on_the_Capital_of_Germany). Bonn would have become the capital of Germany not Berlin. Now I tag Bonn with admin_level=2. The problem is that Bonn is located in North Rhine-Westphalia whose capital is Düsseldorf. So how do I now know that Bonn isn't the capital of NRW? Do I have to tag other capitals with admin_level=2,4 in order to show that they are country and state capitals and admin_level=2 only stands for country capital? Am I going to have to tag nodes with admin_level=2,4,5,6,8... in order to be able to tag e.g. Bonn as admin_level=2,5,6,8...? (Germany has no lvl 3) Because there is no exclude option. Andi ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Applications could avoid that mess if they supported and preferred the admin_centre role of relations. For a long time I believed that the only practical reason for placing capital=yes or state_capital=yes on a node was to help the renderer decide how to render the label; the renderer could then avoid the trouble of handling relations, even though it's not tht hard to handle them, and a good renderer would have to handle them to support multipolygons anyway. Routing and geocoding apps are required to support boundary relations in order to work properly in many other situations, so they should definitely support the admin_centre role, and also give precedence to it in order to handle contradictions between the node and the relation (not only admin_level, but also name and other tags). On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Please explain why admin_level on place nodes harms the database, or refrain from removing it. Thanks. I actually put it back in Berlin after I took a 2nd closer look at Germany. Which then actually revealed that all our state capitals are tagged with admin_level=6 when they should be 4 as far as i understand if you tag them at all... Which then actually made me rethink and discover a possible problem when tagging the node. If you tag Berlin admin_level=2 do you assume it also holds admin_level=4? 6? (Then you realize that with Berlin you actually have a special situation, because it is a city state. But that wasn't even what I was going for.) Now let's say things in Germany would have went a bit different 20 years ago... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_on_the_Capital_of_Germany). Bonn would have become the capital of Germany not Berlin. Now I tag Bonn with admin_level=2. The problem is that Bonn is located in North Rhine-Westphalia whose capital is Düsseldorf. So how do I now know that Bonn isn't the capital of NRW? Do I have to tag other capitals with admin_level=2,4 in order to show that they are country and state capitals and admin_level=2 only stands for country capital? Am I going to have to tag nodes with admin_level=2,4,5,6,8... in order to be able to tag e.g. Bonn as admin_level=2,5,6,8...? (Germany has no lvl 3) Because there is no exclude option. Andi ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 Nullius in verba. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Am 5/14/14 04:51 , schrieb Fernando Trebien: For a long time I believed that the only practical reason for placing capital=yes or state_capital=yes on a node was to help the renderer decide how to render the label; And what happens when go to admin_level=4? __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
In Brazil, admin_level=4 is state level, so it would be state_capital=yes. I've never really thought about it in depth because Brazil only has 2 administrative levels with a capital city and the country only has 1 capital. This is how it looks like in Brazil now: 1. Node tagged as place=city+state_capital=yes, representing a state's capital city, placed (at least in theory) at the city's square one point. (Replace with capital=yes only for Brasília.) 2. Relation tagged as boundary_administrative+admin_level=8+place=city with an admin_centre role referencing the previous node. 3. Node tagged as place=state representing the state, placed at its geometrical center. * 4. Relation tagged as boundary=administrative+admin_level=4+place=state with a label role referencing the previous node and an admin_centre role referencing the first node. I know that Germany has more than 2 administrative levels, and probably that's why values are being used for a capital tag instead of many tags with a single yes value. It does make some sense for a renderer, but does any support more than just 2 visual styles for capitals right now? It would make more sense to require apps to check the relation for its admin_level tag, then it would be impossible to have the relation and the node contradict each other (say, by accident), and there would be no need for a capital tag (it's always the admin_centre of the country or of a state's boundary relation). This would require just a little extra effort for renderers (which must support multipolygon relations anyway) and geocoders, including routers (which must support boundary relations to know to which areas each POI belongs to). * This seems to be the practice in most countries in the world. So much so that we could probably get rid of such nodes and just let the rendered calculate the center and render the label there. On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Am 5/14/14 04:51 , schrieb Fernando Trebien: For a long time I believed that the only practical reason for placing capital=yes or state_capital=yes on a node was to help the renderer decide how to render the label; And what happens when go to admin_level=4? __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 Nullius in verba. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 10:37 AM, sabas88 saba...@gmail.com wrote: In Italy we use capital=* with the corresponding (minimum) admin level, so Rome has capital=2 and so on.. That's for what 'admin_level' role has been created : to connect the administrative place to its boundary. The modeling is better than 'capital' (works for all levels and is formally linking both entities) but I know that renderers prefer tags directly on the node for convenience. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
2014-05-11 3:50 GMT+02:00 Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com: Isn't admin_level a property of boundary=administrative? (that is also a an specialization of a boundary relation) Using admin_level outside (or without) a boundary=administrative relation will be as wrong/incomplete as using service without a highway=service, railway or waterway; or using crossing_ref without crossing, for example. +1 I'd also see it like this. Use the role admin_centre in administrative relations to include the central place, and/or add a capital=admin_level-number on the place object to store its administrative importance conveniently (no need to evaluate administrative relations or to inherit importance from a relation). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
On 11 May 2014 06:32, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: Hm I've looked up a few other cities (Hamburg, Munich, Cologne, Lyon, Marseille, Rotterdam, Zurich, Manchester, Birmingham, Salzburg, Aarhus) and they do not have an admin_level tag on the place=* node. At the same time, I found some other cities that do: Paris [1], Kopenhagen [2], Barcelona [3], Madrid [4], Brussels [5], Amsterdam [6], Bern [7], Vienna [8], Rome [9], Milan [10]: In Italy we use capital=* with the corresponding (minimum) admin level, so Rome has capital=2 and so on.. Regards, Stefano [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17807753 [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13707878 [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/152364165 [4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/21068295 [5] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1635651356 [6] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/268396336 [7] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/18477455 [8] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17328659 [9] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/72959652 [10] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/62505581 I see an approximate pattern: capital cities tend to have an admin_level tag, others tend not to have it. Maybe it's something in use for backward compatibility, such as an with and old renderer that uses it instead of the capital tag to render a label at lower zoom levels. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Berlin Honestly looks like and error nobody has noticed yet. I mean admin_level=2 ? Berlin is a city state which might justify =4, but unless we somehow tag capitals like this I don't see the reasoning behind this tag in the first place. Andi __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 Nullius in verba. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
See also the use of the admin_centre in boundary relations. This allows a place to have a different role/importance for each admin area it is in. An interesting case is Amsterdam, which is the capital of NL but not the provincial capital of the province it is in (that's Haarlem). The tagging reflects the facts, and how they are represented on the map is a matter for the renderer... http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary Colin On 2014-05-11 10:37, sabas88 wrote: On 11 May 2014 06:32, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: Hm I've looked up a few other cities (Hamburg, Munich, Cologne, Lyon, Marseille, Rotterdam, Zurich, Manchester, Birmingham, Salzburg, Aarhus) and they do not have an admin_level tag on the place=* node. At the same time, I found some other cities that do: Paris [1], Kopenhagen [2], Barcelona [3], Madrid [4], Brussels [5], Amsterdam [6], Bern [7], Vienna [8], Rome [9], Milan [10]: In Italy we use capital=* with the corresponding (minimum) admin level, so Rome has capital=2 and so on.. Regards, Stefano [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17807753 [2] [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13707878 [3] [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/152364165 [4] [4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/21068295 [5] [5] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1635651356 [6] [6] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/268396336 [7] [7] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/18477455 [8] [8] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17328659 [9] [9] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/72959652 [10] [10] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/62505581 [11] I see an approximate pattern: capital cities tend to have an admin_level tag, others tend not to have it. Maybe it's something in use for backward compatibility, such as an with and old renderer that uses it instead of the capital tag to render a label at lower zoom levels. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Berlin Honestly looks like and error nobody has noticed yet. I mean admin_level=2 ? Berlin is a city state which might justify =4, but unless we somehow tag capitals like this I don't see the reasoning behind this tag in the first place. Andi __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 [12] wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 [13] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 Nullius in verba. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [1] Links: -- [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17807753 [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13707878 [4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/152364165 [5] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/21068295 [6] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1635651356 [7] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/268396336 [8] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/18477455 [9] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17328659 [10] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/72959652 [11] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/62505581 [12] http://openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 [13] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
In the German Forum we came to the conclusion that the idea probably was to indicate it's the capital (which should be done with role: admin_centre) http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=25418 I removed that Tag from Berlin. Andi Am 5/11/14 06:31 , schrieb Fernando Trebien: Hm I've looked up a few other cities (Hamburg, Munich, Cologne, Lyon, Marseille, Rotterdam, Zurich, Manchester, Birmingham, Salzburg, Aarhus) and they do not have an admin_level tag on the place=* node. At the same time, I found some other cities that do: Paris [1], Kopenhagen [2], Barcelona [3], Madrid [4], Brussels [5], Amsterdam [6], Bern [7], Vienna [8], Rome [9], Milan [10]: [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17807753 [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13707878 [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/152364165 [4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/21068295 [5] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1635651356 [6] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/268396336 [7] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/18477455 [8] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/17328659 [9] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/72959652 [10] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/62505581 I see an approximate pattern: capital cities tend to have an admin_level tag, others tend not to have it. Maybe it's something in use for backward compatibility, such as an with and old renderer that uses it instead of the capital tag to render a label at lower zoom levels. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Berlin Honestly looks like and error nobody has noticed yet. I mean admin_level=2 ? Berlin is a city state which might justify =4, but unless we somehow tag capitals like this I don't see the reasoning behind this tag in the first place. Andi __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
Hello everyone, We're having a little discussion in the Brazilian community about whether the node tagged with place=* that represents a city should/shouldn't have an admin_level=* tag. The wiki states, since at most 2010 [1], that the admin_level tag should not be used on nodes. However, both Berlin [2] and London [3] do include that tag. So what should we do? Update the wiki to state that the tag is allowed it on nodes? Mention a specific exception in the wiki for this type of nodes? Fix the mapping of London and Berlin (and probably hundreds of others)? [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Aboundary%3Dadministrativediff=1000731oldid=552031 [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/240109189 [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/107775 -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 Nullius in verba. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
I think an explicit tagging scheme that specifies the correspondence between place=* tags and admin_level=* tags is a good thing. On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everyone, We're having a little discussion in the Brazilian community about whether the node tagged with place=* that represents a city should/shouldn't have an admin_level=* tag. The wiki states, since at most 2010 [1], that the admin_level tag should not be used on nodes. However, both Berlin [2] and London [3] do include that tag. So what should we do? Update the wiki to state that the tag is allowed it on nodes? Mention a specific exception in the wiki for this type of nodes? Fix the mapping of London and Berlin (and probably hundreds of others)? [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Aboundary%3Dadministrativediff=1000731oldid=552031 [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/240109189 [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/107775 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] admin_level on nodes: wiki vs practice
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: I think an explicit tagging scheme that specifies the correspondence between place=* tags and admin_level=* tags is a good thing. Isn't admin_level a property of boundary=administrative? (that is also a an specialization of a boundary relation) Using admin_level outside (or without) a boundary=administrative relation will be as wrong/incomplete as using service without a highway=service, railway or waterway; or using crossing_ref without crossing, for example. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
