[OSM-talk-be] boundary names and my program

[Jan-willem De Bleser]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 4:51 AM, A.Pirard.Papou <A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com>wrote:

> I have presented this to tagging at osm, and I think I mentioned it on
> talk-be at osm:
>
> The municipality (L8=level 8) border segments (ways between two
> municipalities) should be assembled with multilinestring to form
> arrondissement L7 border segments.
> Then, the border of the arrondissement are now a much smaller number of L7
> segments.
> We may do the same at higher levels.
> The L8 borders are tagged admin_level=8, name=municipalityA — municipalityB
> The L7 borders are tagged admin_level=7, name=arrondissementA —
> arrondissementB
> The L6 borders are tagged admin_level=6, name=provinceA — provinceB
> and so on for upper levels or lower levels if they exist.
>
> And then the meaningless saying "the highest admin_level wins" goes away
> by itself, especially when applied to names for which there is no reason to
> apply that rule.
>
> THAT is consistent, coherent, compatible, congruous, harmonious,
> homogeneous, logical, solid, sound, straightforward, uniform,  you name it.
>
> But... no answer that proposition.
>

You're right, that does solve the "which layer?" problem. If you mentioned
that earlier in the thread, I'm sorry, I must have missed it.

The problem I have, however,  is that by using name=A-B, you're trying to
give the boundaries a name when it really is the municipalities that have a
name.

To use your example above, what if the L8 boundaries are all members of
multipolygon relations, each with the name of a municipality, the L7
members of multipolygons named after arrondissements, and so on. If you
have the border, it is a single api call to find which relations it is a
member of, and then you can easily extract the name. This is pretty much
what they suggest on the wiki (well, that or left: and right: tags). I
assume your program could do that extra query without difficulty? Should be
easy in Josm as it grabs any relation in the bounding box, but I'll have to
take a look at Potlatch to see if it's possible there.

Essentially, I don't want to have to "agree" on a name, I want to use the
one that's already there.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20121129/19f57436/attachment.htm>