<div>The boundaries use relations, of course. :) That's why the Japanese tampering incident I mentioned previously had such a big effect.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The admin boundary proposal I added in OSM's Wiki several months ago (look under South Korea) is based on the administrative division system as outlined in Wikipedia here:</div>
<div><a href="http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EB%AF%BC%EA%B5%AD%EC%9D%98_%ED%96%89%EC%A0%95_%EA%B5%AC%EC%97%AD">http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EB%AF%BC%EA%B5%AD%EC%9D%98_%ED%96%89%EC%A0%95_%EA%B5%AC%EC%97%AD</a></div>
<div>The English version of the article doesn't have the same table that I'm referencing, BTW.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Basically, your proposal is nearly identical to mine, except for one thing - I have defined admin_level=7. This is mostly for Gu's within regular cities. Many cities like Yong-in has both Gu and Dong. Your proposal would put both the city itself and its lower Gu's on the same admin_level, which would not be ideal.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Also, I'm considering admin_level=6 for use on the Basic Self-Governing Entity (BSGE, 기초자치단체), and regular city's Gu doesn't fall under this - only the metropolitan or special city's Gu does. So it would seem ideal to put them under admin_level=7, just above Dong's admin_level=8. In addition, cities within Special Self-Governing Province (Jeju) are not considered a BSGE either, so they would be put under admin_level=7, too.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>As for the "place" tag, I've implied the usage in the Wiki article, but upon reading your suggestion, I'm abandoning the attempt to do a 1:1 equivalency between admin_level and place tags. Here's my revised suggestion:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>state = Do</div>
<div>county = Gun</div>
<div>city = Si</div>
<div>town = Gu</div>
<div>village = Dong, Eup, Myeon</div>
<div>hamlet = Tong, Ri</div>
<div> </div>
<div>According to the Korean law, an area could earn city (Si) status when population reaches 50,000. So OSM Wiki's suggestion of 100,000+ seems to fit more or less.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I was initially thinking about using "suburb" in the hierarchy, but the Wiki only defines it as a distinct section of a city or a town and present no clear placement. So I decided to leave that out, use town for Gu, and push the other smaller district down one level.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>As for district node / district boundary thing, here's what I've observed in the map rendering. If there's a closed district boundary, but no district node set as admin_centre, the region does not get labeled, at least as far as large regions are concerned. North Korea's Kangwon Province doesn't have an admin_centre node, but South Korea's Gangwon Province does, and only the South Korean one has that blue label on the zoomed out map.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>So I'm going to put an admin_centre node inside any district boundary that I create, just to be sure.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>To summarize my suggestions / observations:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>admin_level: add level 7 for Gu and non-BSGE Si</div>
<div>place: use town for Gu and push others down one level</div>
<div>district node in a district boundary: might be needed for label rendering</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Andrew Errington <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:erringtona@gmail.com" target="_blank">erringtona@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT:#ccc 1px solid;MARGIN:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;PADDING-LEFT:1ex" class="gmail_quote">Hi Wesley,<br><br>Good work.<br><br>I haven't checked, but have you been making the boundaries using<br>relations, so that you can re-use common segments of the boundaries?<br>
<br>I agree with your choice of admin_level for -do. I thought about this<br>carefully a while ago, and I have been waiting for a chance to discuss<br>it. Here are my conclusions.<br><br>Admin levels:<br><br>1 N/A<br>
2 National border (South Korea coastline and 38th parallel)<br>3 N/A<br>4 Province (-do), Metropolitan City (gwangyeok-si), Special City<br>(Seoul) (teukbyeol-si), Special Self-governing Province (Jeju)<br>
(teukbyeol-jachido)<br>5 N/A<br>6 County (-gun), City (-si) or District (-gu)<br>7 N/A<br>8 Township (-myeon), Town (-eup), Neighbourhood (-dong)<br>9 N/A<br>10 Village (-ri), -tong or -ga<br>
<br>If you agree (or rather, if there is no disagreement for anyone) I<br>would be happy to edit the wiki and add an entry for Korea to the<br>list.<br><br>For classifying the size of places I came up with this:<br>Place (defined in Wiki) Korean place (suggestion)<br>
<br>city 100,000+ -si (including gwangyeok-si and teukbyeol-si)<br><br>town 10,000 - 100,000 -myeon -eup -dong<br><br>village <10,000 -ri -tong -ga<br><br><br>
Finally, do we need a district node if we have a district boundary?<br>The district node can be calculated as a centroid of the boundary. I<br>think that's what the map renderer does when it places the label for a<br>
region.<br><br>Best wishes,<br><br>Andrew<br>
<div>
<div class="h5"><br><br><br>On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung<br><<a href="mailto:wesley96@gmail.com">wesley96@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> It has only been a couple of days since my last update, but the progress<br>
> went surprisingly fast.<br>><br>> And it is my pleasure to tell everyone that the top-level (admin_level=4,<br>> equivalent to "do" and "gwangyeoksi") boundaries for South Korea is now<br>
> complete and online.<br>><br>> I keep the list of them on my OSM Wiki page, so you can peruse them there:<br>> <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Namuori" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Namuori</a><br>
><br>> I plan to fix up the boundaries for North Korea real quick and then<br>> reorganize the city and district labels for South Korea. The ones currently<br>> on OSM are not only out of date, but have lots of duplicates.<br>
><br>> The rules I'm going to apply for the labeling are simple: for the cities,<br>> full name will be used for Korean and the short name will be used for<br>> English. For example, Ulsan Metropolitan City would be 울산광역시 (Ulsan). For<br>
> all other types of districts, full name will be used for both languages,<br>> with the romanized suffix separated by a hyphen in English. For example,<br>> Yeoksam District in Seoul would be 역삼동 (Yeoksam-dong).<br>
><br>> For the location of the district nodes, they will be placed near the center<br>> of the district if no boundaries are set. "is_in" tag will be used to<br>> properly indicate the hierarchy. Should a boundary be set, it would be moved<br>
> to where the town hall is, and have an admin_centre tag for the boundary<br>> relation. "place" and "admin_level" tags will follow the proposed rules I've<br>> written in the wiki:<br>> <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#admin_level" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#admin_level</a><br>
> For example, the Yeoksam District would have place=town and admin_level=8.<br>><br>> 한국어 요약:<br>> 대한민국 내 광역자치단체 단위의 행정구역 설정이 모두 완료되었습니다.<br>><br>> 조만간 시/군 이하 단위의 지역명 정비를 할 예정입니다. 시 이름의 경우 한국어는 전체이름을 쓰되, 영어는 시의 이름만 표기하며(예:<br>
> 울산광역시 -> Ulsan), 나머지 지역 종류는 두 언어 모두 전체 이름을 쓰되, 영어의 지역 명칭은 로마자화시킨 한국어를 하이픈으로<br>> 분리시켜 표시할 예정입니다(예: 역삼동 -> Yeoksam-dong).<br>><br>> 지역 노드에 "is_in" 태그를 추가하여 계층구조가 제대로 인식되도록 하며, 위의 링크를 참고하여 "place",<br>
> "admin_level" 태그도 설정할 예정입니다.<br>><br>> - Wesley (OSM: Namuori)<br>><br></div></div>> _______________________________________________<br>> Talk-ko mailing list<br>> <a href="mailto:Talk-ko@openstreetmap.org">Talk-ko@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko</a><br>><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Wesley Hwang-Chung<br>Tool-Box.info<br>