[Talk-in] Administrative Boundary

Walter Nordmann wnordmann at gmx.de
Tue Sep 6 07:20:22 UTC 2016


Hi,

Yes, admin_boundaries should be relations (multipolygons) with this tags:

type=boundary, boundary=administrative, admin_level=XX, name=YY.

area=yes is not needed, because boundaries are always closed (or should 
be ;)) and are describing an area.

Just to be shure i checked Velur Ward IV 
https://openstreetmap.org/relation/6526524 and it's looking fine. BUT 
there are remains of the old boundary ways, which should be removed from 
OSM.

See 
https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/images/osm/snaps_2016/Velur_Ward_IV.png 
which shows a  Josm view of that area.
Pink: new relation, red: old redundant ways, which should be removed.

Regards
walter/germany

btw: I'm doing a lot of stuff with boundaries.

see https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/boundaries for QA and exporting 
boundaries
and 
https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.php/projekte/internationale-administrative-grenzen/missing-boundaries

detail: 
https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/index.php/projekte/internationale-administrative-grenzen/missing-boundaries/10-osm-reports/667-countries-compare-2016-08-28
One AL6 in India has been deleted. It's just "gone", but we don't know why.

there will be a report every day. current day is still running.



More information about the Talk-in mailing list