[Talk-ko] South Korea top-level admin boundary creation complete
Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung
wesley96 at gmail.com
Thu Sep 6 09:49:39 BST 2012
The boundaries use relations, of course. :) That's why the Japanese
tampering incident I mentioned previously had such a big effect.
The admin boundary proposal I added in OSM's Wiki several months ago (look
under South Korea) is based on the administrative division system as
outlined in Wikipedia here:
The English version of the article doesn't have the same table that I'm
Basically, your proposal is nearly identical to mine, except for one thing
- I have defined admin_level=7. This is mostly for Gu's within regular
cities. Many cities like Yong-in has both Gu and Dong. Your proposal would
put both the city itself and its lower Gu's on the same admin_level, which
would not be ideal.
Also, I'm considering admin_level=6 for use on the Basic Self-Governing
Entity (BSGE, 기초자치단체), and regular city's Gu doesn't fall under this - only
the metropolitan or special city's Gu does. So it would seem ideal to put
them under admin_level=7, just above Dong's admin_level=8. In addition,
cities within Special Self-Governing Province (Jeju) are not considered a
BSGE either, so they would be put under admin_level=7, too.
As for the "place" tag, I've implied the usage in the Wiki article, but
upon reading your suggestion, I'm abandoning the attempt to do a 1:1
equivalency between admin_level and place tags. Here's my revised
state = Do
county = Gun
city = Si
town = Gu
village = Dong, Eup, Myeon
hamlet = Tong, Ri
According to the Korean law, an area could earn city (Si) status when
population reaches 50,000. So OSM Wiki's suggestion of 100,000+ seems to
fit more or less.
I was initially thinking about using "suburb" in the hierarchy, but the
Wiki only defines it as a distinct section of a city or a town and present
no clear placement. So I decided to leave that out, use town for Gu, and
push the other smaller district down one level.
As for district node / district boundary thing, here's what I've observed
in the map rendering. If there's a closed district boundary, but no
district node set as admin_centre, the region does not get labeled, at
least as far as large regions are concerned. North Korea's Kangwon Province
doesn't have an admin_centre node, but South Korea's Gangwon Province does,
and only the South Korean one has that blue label on the zoomed out map.
So I'm going to put an admin_centre node inside any district boundary that
I create, just to be sure.
To summarize my suggestions / observations:
admin_level: add level 7 for Gu and non-BSGE Si
place: use town for Gu and push others down one level
district node in a district boundary: might be needed for label rendering
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Andrew Errington <erringtona at gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi Wesley,
> Good work.
> I haven't checked, but have you been making the boundaries using
> relations, so that you can re-use common segments of the boundaries?
> I agree with your choice of admin_level for -do. I thought about this
> carefully a while ago, and I have been waiting for a chance to discuss
> it. Here are my conclusions.
> Admin levels:
> 1 N/A
> 2 National border (South Korea coastline and 38th parallel)
> 3 N/A
> 4 Province (-do), Metropolitan City (gwangyeok-si), Special City
> (Seoul) (teukbyeol-si), Special Self-governing Province (Jeju)
> 5 N/A
> 6 County (-gun), City (-si) or District (-gu)
> 7 N/A
> 8 Township (-myeon), Town (-eup), Neighbourhood (-dong)
> 9 N/A
> 10 Village (-ri), -tong or -ga
> If you agree (or rather, if there is no disagreement for anyone) I
> would be happy to edit the wiki and add an entry for Korea to the
> For classifying the size of places I came up with this:
> Place (defined in Wiki) Korean place (suggestion)
> city 100,000+ -si (including gwangyeok-si and
> town 10,000 - 100,000 -myeon -eup -dong
> village <10,000 -ri -tong -ga
> Finally, do we need a district node if we have a district boundary?
> The district node can be calculated as a centroid of the boundary. I
> think that's what the map renderer does when it places the label for a
> Best wishes,
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung
> <wesley96 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > It has only been a couple of days since my last update, but the progress
> > went surprisingly fast.
> > And it is my pleasure to tell everyone that the top-level (admin_level=4,
> > equivalent to "do" and "gwangyeoksi") boundaries for South Korea is now
> > complete and online.
> > I keep the list of them on my OSM Wiki page, so you can peruse them
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Namuori
> > I plan to fix up the boundaries for North Korea real quick and then
> > reorganize the city and district labels for South Korea. The ones
> > on OSM are not only out of date, but have lots of duplicates.
> > The rules I'm going to apply for the labeling are simple: for the cities,
> > full name will be used for Korean and the short name will be used for
> > English. For example, Ulsan Metropolitan City would be 울산광역시 (Ulsan). For
> > all other types of districts, full name will be used for both languages,
> > with the romanized suffix separated by a hyphen in English. For example,
> > Yeoksam District in Seoul would be 역삼동 (Yeoksam-dong).
> > For the location of the district nodes, they will be placed near the
> > of the district if no boundaries are set. "is_in" tag will be used to
> > properly indicate the hierarchy. Should a boundary be set, it would be
> > to where the town hall is, and have an admin_centre tag for the boundary
> > relation. "place" and "admin_level" tags will follow the proposed rules
> > written in the wiki:
> > For example, the Yeoksam District would have place=town and
> > 한국어 요약:
> > 대한민국 내 광역자치단체 단위의 행정구역 설정이 모두 완료되었습니다.
> > 조만간 시/군 이하 단위의 지역명 정비를 할 예정입니다. 시 이름의 경우 한국어는 전체이름을 쓰되, 영어는 시의 이름만
> > 울산광역시 -> Ulsan), 나머지 지역 종류는 두 언어 모두 전체 이름을 쓰되, 영어의 지역 명칭은 로마자화시킨 한국어를
> > 분리시켜 표시할 예정입니다(예: 역삼동 -> Yeoksam-dong).
> > 지역 노드에 "is_in" 태그를 추가하여 계층구조가 제대로 인식되도록 하며, 위의 링크를 참고하여 "place",
> > "admin_level" 태그도 설정할 예정입니다.
> > - Wesley (OSM: Namuori)
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-ko mailing list
> > Talk-ko at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-ko