<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 06/16/2013 07:30 PM, Kurt Roeckx
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:20130616173056.GA27830@roeckx.be" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 07:02:01PM +0200, Glenn Plas wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Kurt (a.o),
I checked the Rotselaar/Werchter setup and I made a single change to
the Rotselaar relation:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/214462">http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/214462</a>
The only thing I think was missing is adding the Werchter boundary
relation as a 'subarea' to the Rotselaar one.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Thanks for fixing that.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
No problem, it's a joint effort isn't it ?<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20130616173056.GA27830@roeckx.be" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Did the same setup for Rijmenam/Bonheiden. There aren't many
'fusiegemeentes' being mapped -unfortunately- although it would be
highly interesting to have them, not only from a nominatim (search)
point of view, but also for addressing in general.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
The problem is ussually finding the right data, and making sure
that there is no license problem with adding that data.
</pre>
</blockquote>
True, concerning the license on this sort of data, I'm feel this
should somehow be open data by nature. Only problem is finding an
absolute reliable source indeed<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20130616173056.GA27830@roeckx.be" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The change I made will probably trigger some changes in the
nominatim search result in a few days , I now expect that Leuven
will be replaced by Rotselaar in the search result set when looking
up Werchter in a few days.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Nominatim shows all the levels, including those I think it
shouldn't. It currently shows:
Werchter, Rotselaar, Leuven, Flemish Brabant, Flanders, 3118,
Belgium, European Union</pre>
</blockquote>
I see what you mean but that's the administrative hit. And it's
pretty realistic. If you try 'werchter' search on google maps you
only get back 1 hit (the city). Nominatim shows 2 hits, and the
non-administrative hit is comparable to the Google result with a big
exception, the postal code is missing from nominatim. (looking at
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<a
href="http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=367851">http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=367851</a>
).<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:20130616173056.GA27830@roeckx.be" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
I just noticed that if you look up "3118 Rotselaar" in google
maps, that it properly shows what Werchter looks like, because
it has it's own postal code. It's more correct than what I
added.</pre>
</blockquote>
Strange, It looks pretty good indeed now, I was looking at something
else before where I noticed a gap above Werchter (still in
Rotselaar). The upper borders didn't match... But it sure looks ok
in google maps. <br>
<br>
Now I wonder where that data comes from now. (and who paid for it)<br>
<br>
Glenn<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>