<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body>
<p>I think so too, and it is now, but during the Avon years I'm not
sure what the situation was</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/01/2021 10:03, Nick Whitelegg
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:VI1PR07MB5869540489B7B39C85F8B171A6AA0@VI1PR07MB5869.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
I thought Bristol was in the "City and County of Bristol" before
Avon existed? Not saying I'm right, I just thought this was the
case.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Nick</div>
<div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div id="Signature">
<div>
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" dir="ltr"
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);
font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:12pt">
<div style="margin:0px"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt"
face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Chris
Hodges <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:chris@c-hodges.co.uk"><chris@c-hodges.co.uk></a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> 11 January 2021 12:09<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org">talk-gb@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org"><talk-gb@openstreetmap.org></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Talk-GB] Traditional Counties and Vice
Counties</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span
style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText">The problem is each application uses
a subtly (or not so subtly)
<br>
different set.<br>
<br>
<br>
While it would be nice to have the boundaries in the data,
it would be a <br>
huge effort to get them in bearing in mind the need to
cross reference <br>
the boundaries that were in force when each use was set
up. And that's <br>
on top of the complexity of how to represent the data,
without too many <br>
duplicates: is the birding county of Avon exactly the
same as the old <br>
postal county of Avon? Probably not because postal
counties were odd. <br>
Then there's the cricketing county of Gloucestershire,
with the ground <br>
in Bristol - which was in Gloucestershire when the club
was founded, <br>
before Avon existed.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 11/01/2021 11:31, Andrew Black wrote:<br>
><br>
> On 11/01/2021 00:33, Robert Skedgell via Talk-GB
wrote:<br>
>> Another example of a niche use of traditional
counties is sport. For<br>
>> athletics purposes. I was born in Sutton
Coldfield, West Midlands and<br>
>> live in Stratford, London, but can compete in
county championships in<br>
>> Warwickshire or Essex.<br>
><br>
> I think there are loads of similar instances. I have
just joined the <br>
> ramblers (just before LD3!). The Bromley branch is in
Kent not London.<br>
><br>
> I think there are a number of issues in different
parts of country<br>
><br>
> 1. "Middle aged counties" like Avon and Cleveland
that have gone but <br>
> the old regime has not quite been reinstated.<br>
><br>
> 2. Areas in london that were never part of the London
postal district <br>
> but are now in greater london, I have given up
arguing that Bromley <br>
> is not in Kent.<br>
><br>
> 3. Possibly similar issues in metropolitan counties
in W midlands, G <br>
> Manchester, former yorkshire....<br>
><br>
> Not sure there is any easy answer to this. I recall
a discussion <br>
> about it during August a few years back (remember
reading it whilst on <br>
> holiday!). Can't remember the details<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
>> On 08/01/2021 10:59, Chris Hodges wrote:<br>
>>> Traditional counties (for some value of
"traditional", that's not the<br>
>>> same as ceremonial) are still used for some
niche purposes. This is<br>
>>> particularly obvious to me living in Avon,
which is neither current nor<br>
>>> ceremonial.<br>
>>><br>
>>> One example is wildlife records - here's the
British Trust for<br>
>>> Ornithology's list of counties:<br>
>>><br>
>>> <a
href="https://www.bto.org/our-science/projects/birdtrack/bird-recording/county-bird-recorders"
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.bto.org/our-science/projects/birdtrack/bird-recording/county-bird-recorders</a>
<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Whether, and how, we should map these is
tricky. I'm not sure anyone<br>
>>> else has. I had hoped to find a bird records
county map to demonstrate,<br>
>>> but failed to do so<br>
>>><br>
>>> Chris<br>
>>><br>
>>> On 08/01/2021 10:34, Andy Townsend wrote:<br>
>>>> On 08/01/2021 09:00, Mark Goodge wrote:<br>
>>>>> Secondly, there's no such thing as
"the" traditional county<br>
>>>>> boundaries anyway. They were fluid,
and subject to change. The<br>
>>>>> Victorians, in particular, were
inveterate tinkerers with local<br>
>>>>> government and were forever tweaking
the boundaries, a little here<br>
>>>>> and a little there. So any
traditional county boundary data can only<br>
>>>>> ever be a snapshot of what the
boundaries were at any particular<br>
>>>>> point in time. And there's no
consensus about which is the most<br>
>>>>> "correct" snapshot to use. Even the
Historic Counties Trust, which<br>
>>>>> aims to promote awareness of the
traditional counties, offers<br>
>>>>> boundary data in different
definitions. We can't possibly include all<br>
>>>>> of them in OSM, but picking just one
of them means making an<br>
>>>>> editorial view as to the most
appropriate snapshot. In the absence of<br>
>>>>> an agreed traditional county standard
for OSM, leaving it up to<br>
>>>>> individual mappers will inevitably
result in inconsistencies.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>> I think (and I'm guessing a bit here)
that the "traditional" ones<br>
>>>> partly in OSM are the
immediately-pre-1974 ones. Modelling the<br>
>>>> pre-1974 changes sounds like something
best done in OpenHistoricalMap,<br>
>>>> and to be honest sounds like a nice
lockdown project for someone<br>
>>>> interested in such things.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I can also see where you're coming from
about whether the traditional<br>
>>>> ones should be in OSM at all. In some
cases the boundary is<br>
>>>> signposted (the "traditional East Riding"
at Stamford Bridge in<br>
>>>> Yorkshire certainly is), and in many
cases boundaries will follow<br>
>>>> natural features that haven't moved, but
in some cases (e.g. Crayke,<br>
>>>> formerly a Durham Exclave until some
early Victorian tinkering, now in<br>
>>>> Yorkshire, <a
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bettss-Crayke-map.png"
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bettss-Crayke-map.png</a>
)<br>
>>>> I don't think they do.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Best Regards,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Andy<br>
>>>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Talk-GB mailing list<br>
>> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
>> <a
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Talk-GB mailing list<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
> <a
href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-GB mailing list<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>