[talk-ph] Tagging of barangays and sitios/puroks

[maning sambale]

>From the wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aplace%3Dquarter
"This does not have to be an administrative entity. "

We agreed in the past that barangay is synonymous to place=village.
Were there any changes with this view?

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 8:57 AM Jherome Miguel <jheromemiguel at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I am already seeing retagging of barangays in urban areas (e.g. Metro Manila) from place=village to place=quarter. Our present guidelines for tagging local government unit (LGU) says barangays always get tagged as village regardless if it's in an urban or rural area, but the recommendation to tag urban barangays to quarter hasn't been documented yet nor discussed (though I agree with it as they better reflect the situation in urban areas and the general tagging recommendations).
>
> Our current guidelines on mapping sitios/puroks is to tag them as place=neighbourhood, even if it's on a rural or isolated area. I tag them as place=hamlet instead, as they better reflect how they are in reality (those are usually clusters of homes with populations of ~100-200, though those are just approximates as they are not covered in censuses) and best follows general tagging recommendations. I'm also considering having this scheme for sitios/puroks depending on their location:
>
> * Urban - place=neighbourhood
> * Rural - place=hamlet
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph



-- 
cheers,
maning
------------------------------------------------------
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
https://github.com/maning
http://twitter.com/maningsambale
------------------------------------------------------