[Tagging] Dispute on tagging place=* in Turkmenistan

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Fri Jan 4 11:20:55 UTC 2019

Am 02.01.2019 um 19:01 schrieb Kevin Kenny:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 11:39 AM Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
>> In any case, on your original question, I would tend towards a national consensus that doesn't deviate too much from the population guidelines in the wiki, if at all reasonable. The US-Hamlet usage is an oddity that, IMHO, should not serve as a role model.
> What's odd?
> Our administrative boundaries? I can't fix that. (Sometimes, I do
> think US mappers get treated with "the tagging model is fine, fix your
> country!" but I don't *think* that's what you're arguing here.)  We
> also have administrative regions with indefinite boundaries, which
> means that there's some force-fitting in OSM - but that's what we
> have. Not all our county lines have ever been surveyed. (US government
> practice is to map them with a fainter line and the words INDEFINITE
> BOUNDARY as at https://caltopo.com/l/D1KV.)
> Our data modelling? In US practice, place=* is based on relative
> importance, not on legal designation. Any boundary=administrative, of
> course, has to follow the legal designation, and in New York at least,
> the designations of 'city', 'town', 'village' and 'hamlet' are based
> on form of government, not on size or importance. That's why we
> *don't* use them to inform place=*, but represent them with
> admin_level=*. (Otherwise, it's a total mess, because of the size
> inversions that I mentioned.
> By the way, I'd call it a 'New York State hamlet usage', because other
> states have other forms of municipal government. That's why we have
> that involved table on the Wiki for mapping the administrative regions
> of the different states to admin_level=*.  Also, our admin_level's are
> not strictly hierarchical, because our municipal governments aren't
> either. But we don't have the luxury of making our politics fit our
> map.
> Making place=* depend on relative importance or population, while
> boundary=administrative depends on political organization, seems to
> follow accepted OSM practice, as far as I can tell. Where have we gone
> astray?

The weird thing is the mixing of place and administrative entities which
actually leads to the inversion issues, go back read your text and you
will find it difficult to determine when you are talking about one or
the other.

May be we need, instead of using place values, a specific key for
mapping the admin levels to "local" names of administrative entities.


> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190104/0a6637c4/attachment.sig>

More information about the Tagging mailing list