[Talk-GB] Traditional Counties and Vice Counties

[Sarah Hoffmann]

Hi,

I've stumbled upon these different boundary types while researching
how to improve geocoding in the UK. I was wondering if, even if they
are not in active use, some are a useful frame of reference for
geocoding. Often there are equivalent administrative boundaries
but there are enough cases where the traditional counties have
vanished completely.

Note that I am not referring to official addresses here. It's more
a question is somebody would type e.g. 'Mold, Flintshire' to distinguish
their village/area. Administrative areas in the UK are only of limited
use as your government seems to re(de)organise the country every
decade or so. I could imagine that the traditional counties are something
that corresponds better to local views on geography.

Sarah


On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 11:14:56PM +0000, Andy Townsend wrote:
> I'm just writing this just as a "for info" in case anyone is interested, not
> as a "someone must fix this now!" kind of thing.
> 
> I recently noticed a few problems with National Parks and AONBs in the UK
> and patched them up (see
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/395232 ).  It then
> occurred to me that there may be similar issues with other
> less-often-visualised areas like traditional and ceremonial counties, so I
> used the same method as in that diary entry to check those.  The same
> ceremonial counties are found both via Overpass and as polygons in a
> rendering database, so there are no problems there.  Traditional counties
> were a different issue though - I had to patch up a couple of minor
> problems, but the following issues remain:
> 
> Brecknock
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8743576
> A never-completed "boundary=traditional"
> 
> Denbighshire
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8748215
> Another never-completed "boundary=traditional".  However, there also is:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/363513
> "boundary=historic_county"
> 
> Flintshire
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8766027
> Another never-completed "boundary=traditional".  However, there also is:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/363512
> "boundary=historic_county"
> 
> Monmouthshire
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8510619
> Another never-completed "boundary=traditional".  However, there also is:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/358021
> which is the modern admin_level=6 area with that name - I've no idea whether
> it matches the old traditional area.
> 
> Montgomeryshire
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8748104
> Another never-completed "boundary=traditional".
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/327867517
> is a boundary way, which is a member of:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2699713
> (ceremonial Powys)
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/134324
> (admin Powys)
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/298880
> ("VC47 Montgomeryshire")
> 
> Radnorshire
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8743599
> Another never-completed "boundary=traditional".  However, there also is:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/359950
> is "VC43 Radnorshire" - but I've no idea whether it matches the old
> traditional area.
> 
> Also missing are the rest of the Welsh ones, any Scottish or Irish ones, and
> the Ridings of Yorkshire, though the Parts of Lincolnshire have been mapped:
> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/128s .
> 
> As for Vice Counties (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice-county for what
> they actually are - I'd never heard of them pre-OSM), apart from a minor
> patch to Pembrokeshire, the UK ones that were present were mostly OK (many
> are missing).  The exception is "vice county 67 South Northumberland":
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2391798
> It appears to be oddly named and, like the Welsh trad counties present;
> incomplete.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Andy
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb