[OSM-talk-be] Brussels and Belgium

[André Pirard]

Thanks Kurt,

Basically, what you write very nicely extends what I wrote.
You use the unique English word "area" where I used "linguistic region"
as a translation of French "région linguistique" and after that change
of terminology, our texts agree mostly.
Note that the proposed change is not a question of terminology but a
switch from community to area.
A few remarks below between your lines.
But...
>> But now, *regarding Nominatim*: 
>
> Please don't tag for the software, fix the software.
Sorry I must disagree with this. First, "tagging for the renderer" is
making tagging mistakes. This not a matter of disregarding rules here
but of choices where no linguistic boundary rules exist.
We just can't say to Nominatim "nu trek je plan" if we don't tell them
or even don't know ourselves what we want or even if it's an impossible
thing to do for them or for us.

Either Nominatim does or will follow the tree topologically and then it
must segregate the boundary types. Then we would have to duplicate every
object, at least all communities, in two disjoint boundaries trees of
political and administrative boundary type. Pure joy!

Or Nominatim will follow the subarea nesting and we will have to care
that all the object that we want to see will correctly nest its
children, making two provinces etc. if that's what we want

But the bottom lines in both cases are:
Which of the two trees will Nominatim use? And let us notice that
Nominatim is not the only one.
Would just language "Gent, Gent Municipality, Dutch speaking area,
Belgium" make sense?
Or would only administrative boundaries be used?  What's the use of
political ones then?
Or should we request that they used both trees?

Could people accustomed to Nominatim look into that issue, possibly with
Nominatim?
Most simple is to point them to this text and ask what they think.

Hence my proposition to simply drop the language tree, use a
conventional administrative tree that will work like for most countries
but with language compliant additions to the names, for example:
Not Village Louveigné, Louveigné, Liège, French Community, Wallonia, Belgium
But Village Louveigné, Louveigné, Sprimont, Liège, Liège(?), Wallonia
(French speaking), Belgium

Cheers,

André.


BTW, Please note Gent in Ghent in Gent.
City Ghent, Arrondissement Gent, East Flanders, Flemish Region,
9000;9030;9031;9032;9040;9041;9042;9050;9051;9052, Belgium
<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?minlon=3.57994079589844&minlat=50.9766578674316&maxlon=3.84927082061768&maxlat=51.1879463195801>
City Gent, Ghent, Arrondissement Gent, East Flanders, Flemish Region,
9000, Belgium
<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?minlon=3.67227983474731&minlat=51.0116233825684&maxlon=3.78616213798523&maxlat=51.1463890075684>

On 2013-11-25 23:37, Kurt Roeckx wrote :
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 09:21:06PM +0100, André Pirard wrote:
>> Let us use the correct words instead.
>> The constitution defines *3 linguistic communities* and *4 linguistic
> So let's be clear about this.
> - Article 2 defines 3 communities:
>   - Dutch-speaking Community, Vlaamse Gemeenschap, la
>     Communauté flamande, Flämische Gemeinschaft
>   - French-speaking, Franse Gemeenschap, la Communauté française,
>     Französische Gemeinschaft
>   - German-speaking Community, Duitstalige Gemeenschap, la
>     Communauté germanophone, Deutschsprachige Gemeinschaft
> - Article 3 defines 3 regions:
>   - Flemish Region, Vlaamse Gewest, la Région flamande, Flämische
>     Region
>   - Walloon Region, Waalse Gewest, la Région wallonne, Wallonische
>     Region
>   - Brussels-Capital Region, Brusselse Gewest, la Région
>     bruxelloise, Brüsseler Region
> - Article 4 defines 4 language areas:
>   - Dutch language area, Nederlandse taalgebied, la région de
>     langue néerlandaise, das niederländische Sprachgebiet
>   - Bilingual Brussels-Capital area, tweetalige gebied
>     Brussel-Hoofdstad, la région bilingue de Bruxelles-Capitale,
>     das zweisprachige Gebiet Brüssel-Hauptstadt
>   - French language area, Franse taalgebied, la région de langue
>     française, das französische Sprachgebiet
>   - German language area, Duitse taalgebied, a région de langue
>     allemande, das deutsche Sprachgebiet
>
> All names copied from the constitution except for the English.
>
> Note that for the Dutch text of the region it says "Brusselse
> Gewest" but other parts of the constitution talk about "Brusselse
> Hoofdstedelijke Gewest".  The same is also the case in French
> where it becomes "la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale", and German
> where it becomes "der Region Brüssel-Hauptstadt".  It's very
> good that we have consitent names in the constitution.
>
> Also see:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communities,_regions_and_language_areas_of_Belgium
>
> Article 4 says that each municipality belongs to one of the
> language areas.
>
> Article 5 defines to which region (article 3) each province
> belongs.  Note that Brussels isn't part of any of the provinces,
> and is it's own region.
>
> Article 127 defines the Dutch-speaking community as covering the
> Dutch language area plus the Bilingual Brussels-Capital area, and
> the French-speaking community as covering the French language area
> and Bilingual Brussels-Capital area.  So the Bilingual
> Brussels-Capital is covered by 2 communities.
I think that the distinction should be noticed between "belongs" and
"covered"
"belongs" meaning that a municipality/province is a part of an
area/region and
"covered" meaning "governing the people in areas" and not defining yet
another third sort of territorial partitioning
> The wiki
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative)
> currently says to use:
> - admin level 3, but boundary=political for communities
> - admin level 4 for regions
> - nothing about language areas
>
> People have always been changing what it says without discussing
> this on the list.  I don't really care how it's mapped, as long
> as we can agree on how to map it and then stop changing it.
In fact, reviving the History of that page explains more or less what is
the present state.
So, I wonder why it has been removed (or why the present map state is so).
But it's what you say.

>> So, in addition to correcting those wrong names:
>>
>>   * a Brussels bilingual region should be added, it should be inside
>>     Belgium.
> I assume that's area and not region.  We don't seem to have
> area's yet?
Yes according to your new terminology
> For Brussels we have a:
> city:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2404020
>
> And a region:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/54094
>
> Buth people seem to love to add the same ways to relations
> instead of just using it as subarea.
Please extend on this
Are you saying that only municipalities (8 or 9) must have borderlines?
And that the upper levels could contain only the nested ones as subareas
and no outer/inner ways?
That would logical and very interesting !!!  The present method would me
masochism !!!
>>  * Brussels-Capital Region
>>     <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/54094> should be
>>     removed from within French and Flemish speaking regions.
> If it's part of anything, it's part of the communities, not
> the regions.  And it's currently part of the communities.
Not my opinion.  I thought we agreed that no territory should be inside
a community.
In fact that there is no community on the map.
Either Brussels-Capital Region above must be its own area or it must be
inside one.
And that area must be part of Belgium.

>>   * there should be a hole in the Flemish region to put that
>>     Brussels-Capital bilingual region into
> There should be a hole in the language area (which we don't have)
> and the region
> (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/53134), which seems
> to be the case, 
yes I know
> and you can argue about the communitie
> (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/53136)
What I meant is that that there should be a whole in the
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/53136 community to be
renamed linguistic region to be renamed area according to your terms.

Now if your non-masochist-subarea-only method could be used, Dutch
language area relation would only contain Flemish Region and its hole as
subarea, as per definition, wouldn't it?

>> But now, *regarding Nominatim*:
> Please don't tag for the software, fix the software.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20131128/cf80e310/attachment.htm>