[Talk-GB] Checking UK Towns

Colin Smale colin.smale at xs4all.nl
Wed Jan 30 17:38:56 UTC 2019


I also have a couple of observations about these changes. 

1) Sometimes an admin_centre is being added to a boundary=political
(e.g. parliamentary constituencies, electoral wards). I am not sure this
is appropriate. 

2) There are multiple definitions of "town", and I don't know which
definition Gregory is using here for place=town. A parish council can
simply call itself a town council if it so resolves. This is independent
of other definitions of "town" based on population, market charter,
letters patent etc. 

3) Unparished areas are recorded and numbered in the governments GSS
coding system (codes start with E43). Maybe we should follow their level
of (dis)aggregation w.r.t. multiple contiguous parishes? Do they
possibly qualify as statistical areas?

Colin 

On 2019-01-30 18:01, Will Phillips wrote:

> I've already raised concerns I have in a changeset comment about these edits adding admin_level=10 administrative boundary relations for voids between civil parishes. They are tagged with designation=non-civil_parish. This has been discussed on this list previously. My main objection is that these areas aren't really administrative entities at all. Gregory correctly points out they are sometimes used for statistical purposes, but I don't think that justifies tagging them as administrative.
> 
> Another concern is that these admin_level=10 voids often include several former civil parishes, so they cover a wider area than the name given to them suggests. An example is Beeston: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9246079
> This new relation covers five former civil parishes (Attenborough, Beeston, Bramcote, Chilwell and Toton) and so includes a wider area than what is usually considered to be Beeston. If Beeston is mapped as an area I think it would be better to use something closer to the area of the former civil parish.
> 
> Gregory has already agreed to think about alternative tagging for this, but I thought it was worth raising here, in case other people have any thoughts.
> 
> Cheers,
> Will
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190130/da610330/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list