[Tagging] Tags for neighborhoods / subdivisions

Josh Doe josh at joshdoe.com
Wed May 11 16:19:00 BST 2011

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 5:26 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> yes, you can use suburb for all kinds of subdivisions, but it is not
> really helpful for other then find something for a given name. In the
> case of an actual hierarchy ("is contained in") or a quantitative
> distinction ([neighbour hood] "is smaller then" [suburb]) it would be
> desirable to have this relation in the database as well. So
> place=neighbourhood would be preferable to suburb for mapping
> neighbourhoods.

I'm tending more and more to think we need place=neighbourhood,
especially since suburb is such a misnomer as it's used in OSM.

> Yes, I also would like to have an approach to do nested hierarchies as
> well as parallel systems for "sub-settlement places". In Rome there is
> at least 4 different systems of toponyms/subdivisions (plus other
> toponyms for various places), which apparently sometimes do overlap or
> not, and are there for historic reasons besides the actual current
> administrational divisions. I feel that mapping all of them with
> different place values does seem reasonable.
> To give you an idea this is an overview in Italian:
> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suddivisioni_di_Roma  (the English
> version concentrates on administration and is leaving out a lot of
> aspects). We already talked about this locally, but did not yet move
> towards a proposal.

That's certainly more complicated than anything I'll need to use, so a
solution for that should work for my situation.


More information about the Tagging mailing list