[talk-ph] Provincial relations ( no not your far away relatives :-) )
Eugene Alvin Villar
seav80 at gmail.com
Sun Mar 27 15:21:10 BST 2011
Where did you get the Cagayan boundaries? The relation you added for
Claveria <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1513450> and
Santa Praxedes <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1513446>
are wrong since the town center of Claveria
<http://osm.org/go/42wXlrw2--> has been included within Santa
Praxedes' boundary relation.
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> Well, I've been monitoring your edits and have fixed most of the
> errors though not the omissions. :-)
> Some notable errors that I fixed:
> 1. Batanes is not part of Cagayan. I've removed Batanes from the
> Cagayan relation but I didn't create the Batanes relation.
> 2. Siquijor is not part of Cebu. I've removed Siquijor from the Cebu
> relation and marked the coastline of Siquijor as its own boundary
> since there are no other visible islands of Siquijor (I think) such
> that a relation is needed.
> 3. Mapun (Cagayan de Tawi-Tawi) is not part of Palawan. I've removed
> the municipality's islands from the Palawan relation. They (and the
> Turtle Islands) have yet to be included in the Tawi-Tawi relation.
> 4. When you moved the QC-Rizal boundary to Marikina River (which I'm
> not sure is really correct), you created a duplicate river centerline.
> I've fixed that, though research is needed to correctly determine if
> the boundary is indeed on the Marikina River.
> 5. Davao City is not part of Davao del Sur (though they're often
> grouped together).
> 6. Zamboanga City is not part of Zamboanga Sibugay.
> One major error that is yet to be fixed is that Dinagat Islands is no
> longer a province since the law that created it was struck down by the
> Supreme Court as unconstitutional. So the islands revert back to
> Surigao del Norte.
> Regarding #5 and #6 above, I think that highly-urbanized cities (like
> Baguio) and independent cities (like Cotabato) should be considered
> outside the province admin boundary relations since these cities are
> completely independent of any province administratively. But until we
> have accurate city/municipal boundaries, I guess the current situation
> can exist. Davao City and Zamboanga City (aside from Metro Manila
> cities) are the current exceptions since they already have available
> As for the Cavite boundaries, they're very crude especially in the
> southwestern half, but I guess they can be improved in the future.
> BTW, it seems that some of your admin relation edits is just
> rearrangement of the ways so that they're in order? While this is
> nice, it's not necessary since all the renderers that I know of can
> handle out-of-order ways.
> On your PS: I think you're also signed up using another address:
> haylockid at gmail.com?
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Ian Haylock <haylocki at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Just finished creating relations for all the provinces.
>> To answer Mannings email.
>> Well done you found one of my deliberate mistakes :-)
>> Actually I have no real idea which islands belong to which provinces. Feel free to move them from one relation to another.
>> Sulu, and Palawan Provinces probably have some errors, as there are just so many islands.
>> Some islands are also missing from the relations, those that I missed, which shouldn't be many, and those that are just a single node. feel free to add them.
>> Also converted the admin areas in Mindano to relations. This is Seav's area I think. So worth checking they're correct.
>> Also fixed a lot of broken boundaries in Manila, still some to go yet though.
>> Added the municipalities for Cavite just so I could add the barangay that I live in, so that searching for my street would work. After 4 1/2 years I discover I live in Mambog, not Molino. Still at least the mail still arrives :-)
>> Does anyone know of a source of municipalities that we could use ? Any reasonable maps would do.
>> Cheers, Ian
>> P.S. why did I have to sign up to this talk list again ?
More information about the talk-ph