[OSM-talk] administrative boundaries and is_in

[Lester Caine]

Lukasz Stelmach wrote:
> Please, are we talking about administrative boundaries? OK about 
> boundaries and is_in. That is the problem. I think, and I do it, that, 
> is in should reflect administrative structure. Not at all levels but 
> most. E.g.
> 
> place=country,name=Polska,name:en=Poland,is_in=Europe
> 
> but
> 
> place=town,name=Mszczonów,is_in=Mszczonów,żyrardowski,mazowieckie,Polska

The discussion probably needs to be split.
the is_in tab SHOULD be dropped altogether since the other alternative is 
insisting that every entry has an is_in tag?
PROVIDING an is_in result from areas contained on the map is the correct way 
of doing things in the future, but adding hundreds of thousands of 
is_in=Mszczonów,żyrardowski,mazowieckie,Polska type tags is just going to make 
the raw data unmanageable.

( As some of you will know I HATE tags anyway - from a data storage point of 
view they are simply wrong, and if there was a unique 'place' table with 
proper hierarchical links, then the 'żyrardowski,mazowieckie,Polska' would 
just be read from the 'Mszczonów' entry - and we could add alternate language 
versions as well ! )

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php