<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN">
<html><body style='font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif'>
<p>I had already suggested boundary=planning to SemanticTourist. Boundary=civil is rather ambiguous. In my eyes the boundary tag serves to differentiate which hierarchy the area belongs to. For example boundary=police might serve for police force jurisdictions, with different values of admin_level for force areas and districts (not sure exactly how they are organised).</p>
<p>NP's don't have an admin function in the sense of a separate body to administer them, they are just documents with a legal status which are owned by (and binding on) certain bodies. There might also be Traffic Plans, Landscaping Plans etc etc.</p>
<p>According to Wikipedia:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span>In England the local planning authorities are 32 </span><a class="mw-redirect" title="London borough" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_borough">London borough</a><span> councils, 36 </span><a title="Metropolitan borough" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_borough">metropolitan borough</a><span> councils, 201 </span><a title="Non-metropolitan district" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-metropolitan_district">non-metropolitan district</a><span> councils, 55 </span><a title="Unitary authorities of England" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_authorities_of_England">unitary authority</a><span> councils, the </span><a title="City of London Corporation" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London_Corporation">City of London Corporation</a> <span>and the </span><a class="mw-redirect" title="Council of the Isles of Scilly" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_Isles_of_Scilly">Council of the Isles of Scilly</a><span>.</span></p>
<p><span>Neighbourhood Plans are for subareas of the LPAs.</span></p>
<p><span>Colin</span></p>
<p>On 2013-03-23 18:12, Jason Woollacott wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding-left:5px; border-left:#1010ff 2px solid; margin-left:5px; width:100%"><!-- html ignored --><!-- head ignored --><!-- meta ignored -->
<pre>Thinking about how to code them, maybe boundary=civil would be acceptable.
Somebody could probably form an argument for boundary=Administrative, as
they do have an admin function, but they would need to be different from
the Civil Parish.
Jason (UniEagle)
-----Original Message-----
From: Colin Smale
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 2:24 PM
To: <a href="mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org">talk-gb@openstreetmap.org</a>
Subject: [Talk-GB] Possible Boundary Vandalism Warning
Just wanted to give everyone a heads-up...
User SemanticTourist has been very busy recently with Neighbourhood Plan
areas, particularly in East/West Sussex, Kent and central England.
He has been adding them to the map in a way that IMHO is not compatible
with current practice.
Note that Neighbourhood Plan areas are often coincident with civil
parishes, as the parish council is invited to make its own NP. However
this is not always the case.
The parish can exclude parts of its area from the NP area, and can
cooperate with adjacent parishes to "trade" areas in order to make more
sense from a planning perspective.
In addition, NPs can be set up for non-parished areas by suitable bodies
as determined by the main local authority.
I make the following observations:
1) He uses a single way (with common nodes on common boundaries with
adjacent areas) for a complete boundary instead of boundary relations
and a shared way
2) Tagging the way with boundary=administrative, admin_level=10 despite
the fact that they do not represent an area of local government
3) There appears to be something not quite right with the projection of
his boundaries as they are displaced by several metres with respect to
existing boundaries
In spite of promises made in email exchanges he is continuing to work in
this way. As far as I am concerned it's fine to add NP areas to OSM, but
not as boundary=administrative with
an admin_level as this overloads the way parish/community areas are
tagged at present. We were getting closer and closer to complete
coverage of admin areas in the UK but this
is just spoiling it.
What do others think?
Colin
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<div> </div>
</body></html>