I agree with Rich Welty- if you know the area and the CDP boundary
makes no sense, then remove it.
The issue in the past has been where some people wanted to remove all of them.
- Serge
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote:
I would like to remove
Brad,
Thank you for reminding us of what the Census office says that CDPs are.
I would just add that CDPs are used in some places as de-facto cities
or towns, which is why we've rejected proposals to remove them all.
- Serge
___
Talk-us mailing list
Just to reinforce what has already been said, here's what the Census thinks
of CDPs:
Census Designated Places (CDPs) are the statistical counterparts of
incorporated places, and are* delineated to provide data for settled
concentrations of population that are identifiable by name but are not
That is what I thought as well. It is now gone. If I didn't screw up the
boundary multipolygons everything should be correct. (I hate boundaries!!!)
Thanks for the help,
Clifford
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yes, U.S. Census Bureau treats them as
I would like to remove Machias, Washington admin_level 8 since it does not
exist as a city in Washington. It has been there for a number of years
apparently added by a bot. I plan to leave it as a CDP locality node. There
doesn't seem to be any chance that it will become a city and will most
On 5/19/15 8:35 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
I would like to remove Machias, Washington admin_level 8 since it
does not exist as a city in Washington. It has been there for a number
of years apparently added by a bot. I plan to leave it as a CDP
locality node. There doesn't seem to be any chance
The nodes w/ place names are good to have to support a healthy gazetteer
function. Much harder to make a case for keeping CDP boundaries.
--SEJ
Sent from my electronic tether.
On 2015年5月19日, at 20:47, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
On 5/19/15 8:35 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
I
Yes, U.S. Census Bureau treats them as statistical, not aim boundaries.
--SEJ
Sent from my electronic tether.
On 2015年5月19日, at 21:33, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote:
On 5/19/15 Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
they probably shouldn't be in an administrative boundary
8 matches
Mail list logo
