All sounds great to me, although it would be usefull to add start_dates to them to keep track of this history; one day it'll be usefull to some people; I'm sure of that - one of the oSoc teams here could even use startdates of each municipality (If they find it somewhere, I might add them to OSM).
Met vriendelijke groeten, Pieter Vander Vennet 2018-07-24 11:01 GMT+02:00 joost schouppe <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > Most of the work on street names has been done already, which you can > admire here: https://www.mapcontrib.xyz/t/2d975c-Geplande_ > adreswijzigingen_gemeentefusies > > One more thing to think about: new municipality polygons. I suppose we > just create a new one for each of the new municipalities. But: > - should we map them already as "future boundaries" or do we wait? > - what to do with the old boundaries? We map part-communities at > admin_level=9. Most of the new fusions will already have them. We could > replace them with the current level 8 borders. But since "part communities" > do not exist officially, we can basically just decide what we want to do. > We map them mostly because this is what people know about where they live. > And most definitions of part-communities (though usually vague) start from > "municipalities as they existed in 1976" or similar. My proposal would be: > if there are already part-communities, don't touch them. If there aren't, > downgrade current level 8 to level 9. > > Feel free to extend the wiki about it: https://wiki.openstreetmap. > org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Municipality_Fusions#New_ > official_codes_and_names > And please add anything you're working on to the planning page: > https://github.com/osmbe/community_planning/issues/2 > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
