>> Bath has not lost it's city status, unlike Rochester, so the designation
>> is correct.
> Absolutely, I was questioning the "arbitrary population limit", not the
> city status. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
I was just indicating that while the population is less than 100k, it's
status as a city is
On 2016-02-15 16:46, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 15/02/16 14:15, Colin Smale wrote: On 2016-02-15 13:42, Lester Caine wrote:
>
> So Bath is also a
> city despite being below some arbitrary population limit. Bath has around
> 100k inhabitants, not exactly a hamlet... But it doesn't
> have a city
On 15/02/16 14:15, Colin Smale wrote:
> On 2016-02-15 13:42, Lester Caine wrote:
>
>> So Bath is also a
>> city despite being below some arbitrary population limit.
>>
> Bath has around 100k inhabitants, not exactly a hamlet... But it doesn't
> have a city council, only Charter Trustees.
Bath
lots of places as
> cities that legally aren't.
>
> Paul
>
> Original message
> From: Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl>
> Date: 15/02/2016 14:15 (GMT+00:00)
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] place=village/town/city
>
&
status.
Not that this bothers the centre for cities which counts lots of places as
cities that legally aren't.
Paul
Original message
From: Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl>
Date: 15/02/2016 14:15 (GMT+00:00)
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB]
On 15-Feb-16 13:48, Colin Smale wrote:
And would this
mean that St Davids is place=town, place:designation=city or the other
way round?
I have no axe to grind here (the city I live near has a population
>100,000 anyway), but if the former, I suspect the residents of St
David's would not be
On 2016-02-15 13:42, Lester Caine wrote:
> So Bath is also a
> city despite being below some arbitrary population limit.
Bath has around 100k inhabitants, not exactly a hamlet... But it doesn't
have a city council, only Charter Trustees.
> If we know the
> population then it should be
It might not have gone actually, my e-mailing doesn't always do the right
thing for the lists.
I quoted it in my last e-mail though.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2016-February/018474.html
On 15 February 2016 at 13:48, Colin Smale wrote:
> I can't
I can't find Gregory's suggestion in my mailbox... did it go to the
list?
Is the suggestion to put place:designation=city on the place node? Or on
an admin boundary, or on a landuse=residential or what? Why is
place:designation needed, and not simply designation? And would this
mean that St
On 15/02/2016 12:35, Gregory wrote:
What did people think of my place:designation=* suggestion?
That would make sense, yes.
Mark
--
http://www.markgoodge.com
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
On 15/02/2016 12:35, Gregory wrote:
What did people think of my place:designation=* suggestion?
Sounds good to me. No uses yet (obviously), but would allow a more sane
"place" tagging for e.g. St David's, which isn't a really city in any
normal sense.
Cheers,
Andy
On 12/02/2016 17:10, Philip Barnes wrote:
The original node, http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3216768/history
http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=3216768
Thanks.
So mostly city, but it did spend a couple of years as a town and a
couple of shorter periods as village.
Cheers,
Andy
On 15/02/16 11:08, Mark Goodge wrote:
> The only way to reconcile this, in the long run, is to have two separate
> tags for populated places, one describing the size according to global
> OSM guidelines, and one describing the legal status according to local law.
Since there is a 'Should
What did people think of my place:designation=* suggestion?
>From the "historic cathedral city of Durham",
Gregory.
>Should place:designation=* be a thing, so that we can save the legal
definition somewhere.
>
>You could then say we are tagging place=* for the renderer. But population
is not
Agreed...
FWIW I have been using council_style=city or council_style=town on admin
boundary relations (mostly civil parishes) to indicate non-default
situations.
This works where the status is held by a local authority, but where
Charter Trustees are involved I don't have a solution in mind
On 12/02/2016 17:18, Colin Smale wrote:
Several attempts have been made to "correct" the tagging from city to
village/town... each time it was changed back to city...
This, I think, illustrates why we really could do with a "legal_status"
tag or similar for populated places. People,
On 11/02/16 21:32, Michael Booth wrote:
> So my question is, how are we defining villages, towns and cities? Only
> by population, or do we also take into account their generally accepted
> status (whilst trying to be consistent across the country)?
Population is only a rough indicator ... as you
Like you I would certainly expect Kirkcaldy & Dunfermerline as place=towns.
They were elevated to this status only in the past 2 months, after having
been towns on OSM since 2007. I'll restore them to that status.
Unfortunately the rules for places described on the wiki are poorly
conceived and
Hi Michael,
Going the other way, what's the cutoff between a hamlet and a village?
Population 50? 100? I'd say that with these categories there's some
fuzziness so go with what feels right. On the ground experience over
armchair mapping wins out here I think (as it does for most things OSM).
More
According to Wikipedia, it is country-dependent. As it is an English
word, we should only discuss about its meaning in an English-speaking
context. There is no such thing as a hamlet in Germany for example; they
have different words with different semantics, which may or may not map
onto English
On 11 February 2016 at 21:32, Michael Booth wrote:
> So my question is, how are we defining villages, towns and cities? Only by
> population, or do we also take into account their generally accepted status
> (whilst trying to be consistent across the country)?
In England
On 12/02/16 11:51, Ian Caldwell wrote:
On 11 February 2016 at 21:32, Michael Booth > wrote:
So my question is, how are we defining villages, towns and cities?
Only by population, or do we also take into account their generally
accepted
On 12/02/2016 13:15, Colin Smale wrote:
According to Wikipedia, ...
... I wouldn't assume that what wikipedia says has any particular
relevance with respect to how something is mapped in OSM. The language
used in the English wikipedia is a mix of American and English (and
other) usages,
Leigh-on-sea has a Town Council. And the residents of Leigh (myself included)
like to give it an identity that is distinct from Southend-on-sea, which
historically it was. But in practice you would be hard pushed to claim that
Leigh was a separate town. Administratively, it has been part of the
On 12/02/16 11:51, Ian Caldwell wrote:
On 11 February 2016 at 21:32, Michael Booth > wrote:
So my question is, how are we defining villages, towns and cities?
Only by population, or do we also take into account their
generally accepted
On Fri Feb 12 13:52:13 2016 GMT, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
> which makes it clear why using the "legal city definition" might not
> make sense in OSM _across the board_. It might in some places (it's
> essentially what the Irish do, I believe), but I'd argue it doesn't here
> because of e.g.
On 12 February 2016 at 13:15, Colin Smale wrote:
> According to Wikipedia, it is country-dependent. As it is an English word,
> we should only discuss about its meaning in an English-speaking context.
> There is no such thing as a hamlet in Germany for example; they have
>
Hi all,
In Northern Ireland we have a government body called the Northern Ireland
Statistics and Research Agency, who work with the census data to determine the
size and definition of a settlement - http://www.nisra.gov.uk/
Do you not have the same in the rest of the UK?
Usually when they
Can I mention the City of Brighton and Hove? The city status is held by
the unitary authority (Brighton and Hove City Council). Neither Brighton
nor Hove is a city.
//colin
On 2016-02-12 15:23, Chris Hill wrote:
> On 12/02/16 11:51, Ian Caldwell wrote:
>
>> On 11 February 2016 at 21:32,
We are never going to get worldwide consensus on this, so let's stop trying.
Just focusing on the UK situation, as has been mentioned many times before,
there are multiple definitions of these terms, all equally correct within their
own contexts. there is the legal definition, the people's
On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 14:53 +, Philip Barnes wrote:
>
On Fri Feb 12 13:52:13 2016 GMT, Andy Townsend wrote:
I'd be interested to see the history of St David's. The current
node
http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=3712052604
was only created in August 2015; I wonder what it was
Hi all, new mapper with a question about the place=* tag.
I noticed my town (population 6,000+) was tagged as place=village, so I
looked at the wiki and also other places in my council area before
making any changes.
The wiki gives a suggestion to go by population: city > 100,000; town >
32 matches
Mail list logo