Proposal talk:Admin title

official_status

Why not official_status=de:* ? We use it in Russia (obv. with ru:*). --Zverik (talk) 16:07, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I did not know that. There are ~100000 occurrences in the database, but no documentation in the Wiki. The proposal is still in draft status. Why didn't they proceed with the proposal process? Didn't they care what others think about it? --Fkv (talk) 17:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Because it is used mostly in Russia, and we don't need proposals to actually start using a tag. It looks good, there are no known alternatives, differences in classifications by country are addressed — seems ok. And we discussed it for some days in the Russian forum. --Zverik (talk) 19:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

That still not a excuse for no documentation. Also official might be an issue in some countries, where it's just done like that, but not really "official". --AndiG88 (talk) 21:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

It is not true that there are no known alternatives. As Colin Smale noted in the tagging mailing list, the designation=* key is in wide usage for this in the UK. However, they did an equally poor job in documentation as the russians with their official_status=*. What are the pro's and con's when you compare designation=* with official_status=* ? --Fkv (talk) 21:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Language prefixes. Town in US can mean different thing than town in UK. --Zverik (talk) 09:38, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

You mean en_us and en_uk? The proposal says that it's the (probably ISO 3166 alpha-2) country code - or some non-governmental authority, whatever this can be. I wonder how applications are supposed to make use of a value prefix like that. When all of the administrative units in Russia use the "ru" prefix, and all administrative units in France use the "fr" prefix, etc., then the prefix is essentially redundant to the location of the polygon. --Fkv (talk) 17:33, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Interesting discussion. A note about designation=*: although originally conceived so as to resolve a problem with Rights of Way in England and Way (over time it was realised that neither the highway tag nor access tags, nor designated tags adequately captured the key information), in meaning it is a means of specifying a legal-defined status for an object. It is therefore potentially usable in other circumstances (although there is a potential for an object having multiple legal designations under different legislation). Originally Civil Parish boundaries were imported with the name tag set to "Place CP" partially to ensure that a village and its associated administrative division were distinct. At some later stage the CP was replaced with designation=Civil Parish. In this form designation is clearly a synonym for official_status (i.e., a fairly general tag). In the UK we have the following administrative division type: "Community", "Civil Parish", "District Council", "Unitary Authority" (which may formally have different names in different constituent parts of the UK), "County Council", "Metropolitan Borough", "London Borough", "Greater London", (two admin units do not correspond to any type, and some areas are 'un-parishes' which is a non-status). SK53 (talk) 12:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

I just noticed that the actual value is not "Civil Parish", but "civil_parish". This lowercase-and-underscore spelling can be found in taginfo, on Proposed features/Designation, and on User:Csmale/ukboundaries. That means that the designation=* key is used with machine-readable codes as values, missing the goal of my proposal to have human readable values that can be easily rendered "as is". --Fkv (talk) 06:47, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I created "admin_centre" roel exactly for this purpose

We don't need this tag. Attach the "place=*" node to your admin boundary with the role "admin_centre" and that's it. --Pieren (talk) 12:42, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with the proposal. The proposal is about terms, not capitals. --Fkv (talk) 13:24, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

"place=city" tells you the terms. Up to the applications to translate "city" to the local language. --Pieren (talk) 13:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

No, it doesn't in most cases. In Russia, there are many more terms than "hamlet, village, town, city". We have towns and "town-like places", for example. --Zverik (talk) 15:21, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Declension problem

(@ Frederik Ramm's comment on his vote) The declension problem arises whenever a tag is defined lexically, e.g. as a prefix or suffix. The admin_title key is not defined lexically. So we leave it over to applications how they combine title and name. The may use a colon (title: name) or brackets (name (title)). They may as well use a sophisticated grammar engine for single countries. --Fkv (talk) 08:53, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I have looked a bit into some current examples in Croatia (where I am not a mapper, but I know the language)... admin_level=6 would apparently have admin_title=Županija. Example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/226210 is the county (or whatever English term we use for it) "Varaždinska županija". The town, from which the county name comes from, is "Varaždin", http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/343645893 . Moreover, some counties in Croatia do not have any town name as a base. So, unfortunately, I do not see that this proposal would make a renderer's life easier. In my view, the best solution is that a name[:language]=* of an administrative entity be written in a final form and used by a renderer as is. Everything else (including BTW the already existing name:prefix=* possibility, which is probably pretty meaningless for many languages) does not seem to bring usable positive effects IMHO.--BorutAtOSM (talk) 08:41, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Do places have a title?

(@ Frederik Ramm's comment on his vote) If they don't have a title, protected areas certainly do not have a title either, and we need to get rid of protection_title=*? --Fkv (talk) 08:53, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

"Others in OpenStreetMap do stupid things, therefore stupid things are normal and we should aim to have more of that." - Not an argument. --Frederik Ramm (talk) 21:22, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

So you think that protection_title=* is a stupid thing? Surprisingly, nobody ever objected. --Fkv (talk) 22:48, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Accepting the voting result

The voting ended against this proposal. This result was honorably commented by the proponent. I haven't seen this yet here on this wiki. But I did saw a some abandoned drafted proposals where the proponent fears the outcome of a voting. So those proposals are in draft state till the end of time while the wiki pages for the questionable tags are in full flavor. I like the way how this voting was accepted by the proponent. --Hb 20:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)