[Talk-GB] Should a place be tagged with a node or area?

[SK53]

I'm really not sure that we should be trying to map these at all. If we do
I think Colin's approach is best: a super-relation of other admin entities.
Not easy to create in the online editors but easy enough in JOSM.

There is very little on the ground to allow verification, and I suspect
many will be rather ephemeral entities.

There are numerous other boundaries which might be of more interest, but
still perhaps not suitable for OSM : school and GP catchment areas; police
authority areas and community policing areas; NHS commissioning areas; etc,
etc.

As ever the question is where do we stop. I think a useful questions to ask
are: "Are these boundaries principally used internally to an organisation
with little or no use outside it?"; "Do the boundaries impinge on people
external to the originating organisation such that reference to these
boundaries is likely to be made regularly?"; "Can people tell you where
roughly where these boundaries lie?.

I can at a pinch tell you the catchment area of my GP surgery because they
have a big map on the surgery wall, and once upon a time knowledge of NHS
DHA boundaries was something I need to know professionally, but for the
most part I dont know anything about the others.

Jerry

On 10 February 2017 at 12:01, Colin Smale <colin.smale at xs4all.nl> wrote:

> Hi Brian,
>
> On 2017-02-10 12:36, Brian Prangle wrote:
>
> Hmmmm - that's one way I hadn't thought of. I was thinking of just adding
> a tag to each boundary relation to indicate membership status along the
> lines of west_midlands_combined_authority= constituent_member or
> non-constituent_member as appropriate. It should work just as well and
> won't fry my brain in trying to build a relation of that complexity
>
> The relations shouldn't be complex, certainly not brain-fryingly so.. Also
> a single relation for the WMCA would comply with the principle of "one
> object in real life is one object in OSM" and give a unique starting point
> for users to find the extent and the membership of the authority. Is
> "non-constituent membership" limited to LA's in the vicinity of the West
> Midlands? Anything to stop e.g. Cornwall Council from joining, if they so
> desired?
>
>
>
> Counties might not be officially required but trying filling in an online
> address form and see where it gets you if you omit county!
>
> Not really our problem! What county would you enter for Uxbridge?
> Middlesex? Or Greater London?
>
>
> And what admin status should we give to Local Economic Partnerships?  My
> inclination is not to bother mapping them as boundaries but to add tags as
> above along the lines of LEP= name
>
>
> LA's can belong to multiple LEPs so this might get messy. Again I would
> apply the principle of "one object..." and create a relation for the LEP,
> and make the LAs members. This allows the LEPs to overlap without any
> ambiguity and "not a semicolon in sight"...
>
> //colin
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20170210/4305d7c9/attachment.html>