[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Admin Boundaries and Combined Authorities

[Colin Smale]

I think I replied privately by mistake, so copying to the list now...

On 2020-07-28 11:45, Ed Loach wrote:

> Colin wrote:
> 
>> Thanks for your message. I would like to challenge one point - your assertion that the Regions 
>> at admin_level=5 are in "widespread popular use". It is true that many people talk about 
>> geographical regions like "the South-East" or "the North-West". But these are ill-defined 
>> vernacular phrases and do not refer to the sharply-defined regions that are only occasionally 
>> used in governmental areas. If you asked people "is Essex in the South-East" I expect 99% would 
>> say "yes"
> 
> I must be in that 1% being an Essex resident who lives in the East of England (and gets "Look East" as the local news).

No offence intended of course! It sounds like you are towards the north
of Essex then. But yes, you are right, my use of "99%" was hyperbole to
make a point. Boundaries of TV regions, both BBC and ITV, can also often
appear a bit random to the naked eye and depend to no small degree on
the locations and coverage of transmitters, meaning that my part of Kent
can basically only get London programs unless you have a high-gain
aerial on a pole to get the Kent programs from Bluebell Hill. 

> Admin level 5 is the NUTS 1 regions which as far as I know we are still using to keep statistics from one year to the next even though we have now left the EU. As such it is a meaningful admin level as much as say UPRNs on properties, or references on A roads, or fhrs ids. 
> 
> There is some argument I suppose for changing from boundary=administrative admin_level=5 to boundary=statistical and something to indicate NUTS 1 though (type will have already been used for type=boundary).

That sounds like a good plan to me.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20200728/3786303e/attachment.htm>