[Talk-in] Indian districts tagging

[Arun Ganesh]

1. place=district makes sense. We should change this.

2. Looking at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative it seems
like admin_level=6 is a popular choice for a district level unit in the
other big countries, larger than India. Its a good idea to use 6 for
consistency. And it allows use to use the 5 slot for the zonal councils.




On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Yogesh K S <yogesh at itforchange.net> wrote:

> Currently I see that we have tagged most of the Indian districts(more than
> 300) with place=county[1] but this tag is mainly used on nodes rather than
> on administrative boundaries ways that are tagged with
> boundary=administrative.[2] But we have added administrative boundaries for
> all districts in India[3] and haven't tagged with place tags. And also we
> have used admin_level=5 for all district boundaries but the wiki shows
> admin_level=6 for district boundaries.[4]
>
> Request the community to comment or provide suggestions on -
>
>     1. Whether to use place=district instead of place=county since we
> refer them as districts on the ground in India.[2]
>     2. Whether to update the India wiki page to avoid confusion on using
> admin_level=5 for districts considering we haven't added revenue division
> boundaries[4].
>
>
> [1]taginfo.openstreetmap.in/tags/place=county
> [2]
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place#Administratively_declared_places
> [3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_districts_in_India
> [4]
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_India/Boundaries#Administrative_divisions
>
>
> cheers,
> yogi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>



-- 
Arun Ganesh
(planemad) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Planemad>
<http://j.mp/ArunGanesh>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-in/attachments/20160311/7ee19016/attachment.html>