[Talk-us] Representing census-designated places (CDP), Census County Division (CCD), etc
elliott.plack at gmail.com
Thu Apr 28 21:29:51 UTC 2016
The approach to CDPs varies. Since the boundaries are only for statistics
and I'd argue that CDP boundaries are not really even boundaries in an
administrative sense. Still, the places often provide some value to the
map, such as place names. I like having them as points, at the CDP
centroid, as opposed to boundaries which tend to get cluttered and are
impossible to keep from moving around.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 5:08 PM Paul Norman <penorman at mac.com> wrote:
> On 4/28/2016 12:24 PM, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
> > We are having a discussion about representing statistical boundaries
> > in Brazil and while trying to search for similar cases I found that
> > your CDP (maybe CCD too) seems to be similar:
> > "They don't have any legal status, or represent the jurisdiction of
> > any government. CDPs are created by the Census Bureau for statistical
> > purposes only." - from
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:boundary#United_States
> > Do you represent them (and maybe other statistical boundaries) in OSM?
> > If yes, what are you using? (boundary=?, border_type=?, etc)
> We don't keep them as CDPs, except when they are commonly used by people
> outside the census. This is an uncommon situation, and to my knowledge,
> only the case in Alaska, which is unique in its administrative structure.
> A lot of CDPs were imported and are approximately the same as city
> boundaries, so these remain and get refined as a more accurate city
> Other CDPs are place=* areas, often with unincorporated towns.
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-us