[OSM-talk-ie] When is a townland a townland (and when is it 2+ townlands)?

[Patrick Matthews]

Rory, Dave,

My inclination is the opposite - there are plenty of situations where you
have townlands "split" between civil parishes in exactly the same way as
the ones you mention but where one "part" being in one ED and another in a
different ED means that the two are shown as separate on the post-1898
maps. (There can also be false positives where two completely different
townlands in different parishes but with the same name happen to be in the
same ED, e.g. Corravilla in east Cavan, where two townlands, one in
Shercock parish and one in Knockbride, happen to be in the same ED and are
represented in the maps as a single townland, but have different postal
addresses and are listed separately in the electoral register.)

The methodology of the original Ordnance Survey, for what it's worth, was
to treat each "part" of the townland as a separate entity, and they're
still recorded as separate entities in the 1901 and 1911 census reports.

Baronies split by counties (e.g. Fore, Rathdown) should be treated
separately as they were/are county subdivisions. Civil parishes and
baronies were always independent of each other so the split doesn't matter
there.

Regards,

Paddy.


On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Dave Corley <davecorley at gmail.com> wrote:

> I have a vague recollection of this being discussed way back. The issue is
> not just with townlands if I recall correctly.
>
> I think there may also be cp's split by baronies and baronies split by
> counties and so on.
>
> Your logic seems sound to me, but then again I never got to doing cp's.
>
> Dave
> On 29 May 2016 10:40, "Rory McCann" <rory at technomancy.org> wrote:
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > A while ago I mentioned a possible problem with the Logainm data
> > import, where 2+ townlands were getting the same logainm reference[1].
> > Upon closer investigation, I don't think this is a bug with the import
> > process, but a question of "Is a townland is one townland or many
> > townlands?".
> >
> > Consider Graiguealug townland in Carlow. It's in OSM as 3 different
> > townlands: OSM ids https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2196774
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2274862
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2274863 all touching each
> > other. Each is in a different civil parish[2].
> >
> > However Logainm only has one entry http://www.logainm.ie/en/3531 which
> > is in 3 different civil parishes. Logainm allows one townland to be in
> > more than one CP. If you look at the GSGS map, only one townland is
> > shown on the map, and the total area (~400 acres) is similar to the
> > total off the 3 townlands in OSM.
> >
> > It looks like one townlands was split into 3 townlands so that each
> > townland would be in one and only one CP.
> >
> > However I don't think this is the right approach. I think the OSM
> > philosophy of "One Feature, One OSM Element"[3] should apply, and that
> > those 3 townlands should be merged into 1. The CP boundaries should
> > physically stay where they are, but they will not line up with a
> > townland boundary. I seen other examples of townlands crossing CP
> > boundaries and have mapped them as one townland, with a CP border
> > going through the middle.
> >
> > I'm tempted to merge townlands like this into one townland. What do
> > people think?
> >
> > Rory
> >
> > [1]
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ie/2016-March/001499.html
> > [2] Townlands.ie:
> >
> https://www.townlands.ie/carlow/forth/templepeter/templepeter/graiguealug/
> >
> >
> https://www.townlands.ie/carlow/forth/tullowmagimma/templepeter/graiguealug/
> > https://www.townlands.ie/carlow/forth/nurney/templepeter/graiguealug/
> > [3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
> >
> > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJXSri4AAoJEOrWdmeZivv2Lc8H/AoZcBrdbT3u5y2vvKBnKh8J
> > BKP48p0sVAyMyDAWl3nQ88kqwuHcNcYYBt+aWwfDAeOyBs63OJQ1dlcw1+9EW3iL
> > wxkauYKAvVNEd1m7sHBFWwIdxhmRUfinwrHyNhoIFL84/bExPAs4KCe1epFYwqNd
> > hSFP5lnRuaikct5eEkP9uTr0tGDRkYLzwGOwcj30xZSz89dB786bc/YR834kgigi
> > kYtjL6O+uEZ05Xb1M2kSyzR+LdmEW3tFYEu1RHjxlMKIgOedUAF0+RdEF0qOOmPe
> > optVIDIyxFuTk0BTsqITb05uyPHss58zamz0ldnZBh0AqAg8JTQjxl9/IDxhFqw=
> > =z0F7
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-ie mailing list
> > Talk-ie at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ie mailing list
> Talk-ie at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
>