[OSM-talk-be] some thoughts and remarks about border mapping

[ivom]

Hi,

Just stumbled across a small webapp which allows to see interesting things 
about relations.

An example for a relation (type=border) in Berlin which is a collection of 
ways with administrative boundaries of level 8. 
http://osm.schunterscouts.de/relation-browser.php?type=relation&id=16347

As far as I understand it, this is yet another way to tackle the problem. 
Please note that the Karlsruhe example uses a relation of type=boundary.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Lennard wrote:

> ivom wrote:
>
>> I would like to second Ben's idea of starting to map borders with
>> relations. A nice example which demonstrates borders mapped by relations I
>> found near Karlsruhe:
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/index.html?mlat=49.014750749784966&mlon=8.308414136442622&zoom=13
>>
>> Check what hangs on the river Rhine in terms of relations. I think this is
>> an interesting example what thing could start to look like with respect to
>> borders.
>
> To make it easy for all here:
>
> The middle of the Rhine is a way, tagged:
>
> name = KA Stadt BW
> created_by = Potlatch 0.10b
> boundary = administrative
> admin_level = 4
> source = pi x D. korr. nach: GADM
>
> It is part of the following relations:
>
> Relation 22027
> name = Karlsruhe Regierungsbezirk
> boundary = administrative
> created_by = Potlatch 0.10b
> type = boundary
>
> Relation 22046
> name = Baden-Würtemberg Bundesland
> boundary = administrative
> type = boundary
>
> Relation 22049
> name = Karlsruhe Stadt
> created_by = Potlatch 0.10b
> boundary = administrative
> type = boundary
>
> Relation 23140
> name = Rheinland-Pfalz Bundesland
> boundary = administrative
> type = boundary
> border_type = state
>
> So the way is tagged with the highest admin_level, and it renders as the
> highest level border that way. This is also what Ben suggested. And
> thanks to the relations, you can still extract the correct and full
> border for any admin_level, if you want to generate custom topographical
> maps.
>
> I would suggest keeping a list on the wiki of relations used for
> boundaries in Belgium. This should ideally* keep people from generating
> multiple relations for the same border.
>
>
>
> * Right, Ivo? Since you made a new relation for LF30, while mine was
> already on the map for a few weeks and in the wiki. I'll be connecting
> yours and mine shortly, thanks to a trip to Puyenbroeck yesterday. :)
>
> --
> Lennard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>