Talk:Key:place:PH

Lowercase suffix ":ph"

Lowercase suffixes are normally reserved for language codes, that follow the BCP47 standard, ie. made with subtag containing only letters and/or digits separated by dashes, each subtag being at most 8-characters long and the first subtag being only 2 or 3 letters (subtags in BCP47 are partly coming from parts of several standards, including ISO 639-1/2/3, or ISO 15924, or ISO 3166-1, or UN M.49, or other subtags directly registered in the IANA database of subtags for BCP47 locale tags; the BCP47 has a precise definition of valid tags and why some ISO 639 codes are NOT included and how to choose the best tags when therey are several one that are equivalent, including in the ISO standards themselves). BCP 47 (but not any ISO standard) is also THE standard for all web protocols, because ISO standards are best known to be unstable and not definining any clear usage rule (they are often redondant, sometimes wrong/obsolete/unmaintained, or just insufficient for correctly identifiying locales). BCP 47 offers all the rules needed on top of ISO 639, to provide stability and interoperability (that ISO 639 does not provide at all at the technical level: ISO 639 was only intended for librarian classifications and they have never been able to define a common classification even for their own work (as a result ISO 639 is a mess; only ISO 639-3 is a bit better, as long it is used alone, but still it offers no stability and no interoperability; all ISO 639 codes are largely undocumented, they are a very basic enumeration where codes are just assigned to broad "language" names, without any kind of classification). We should never refer here to ISO 639 (including because ISO standards are now severely closed, no longer published except after registration and payment, unlike BCP 47 which is openly and freely accessible from the RFC editor and the IANA database, and usable by anyone).

There's here a confusion with language code "ph" in BCP 47, which is reserved and which is not your intent as your tag is country-specific but independant of languages used in that country: traditional Tagalog, Pilipino, English, Spanish, Chinese, Javanese, Pali, and some other creoles). What you place in value of this tag is also a documented enumerated value which remains translatable as well.

For country codes used in tags for country-specific data the suffix should be uppercase i.e. "place:PH" here. All other country-specific tags use UPPERCASE codes in suffixes (e.g. "admin_type:FR=*") or as subnamespaces (e.g. "ref:FR:SIREN=*"). Why not this one?

Couldn't it be "admin_type:PH=*" (playing the same role as other "admin_type:<COUNTRY-CODE>=*" in other countries, where the basic distinction by "admin_level=value" is not enough for giving the exact status) ?

Note that "place=*" tags are never related to the official adminsitrative status in OSM or geographic size, they are based on the effective population and/or households. So even the choice of "place:PH" is not accurate, when all you want to tag is an administrative status. That's why I suggest "admin_type:PH=*" and not "place:PH=*".

Think about it: there's still not a lot of data to change and your new "place:ph" tag was never discussed before appearing today on this wiki (it was used de facto without searching first other possible solutions) — Verdy_p ^(talk) 10:00, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The lowercase prefix is likely de facto, because most keys are typed in all lowercase. I will change it to :PH soon. But, since place:ph is in very common use, it will be likely need many batch edits to change place:ph keys on place nodes to place:PH.--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 12:54, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Plus, Philippine mappers are not possibly aware of the admin_type=* tag, so they possibly used the "place" key plus :ph in place. I will look upon it. If "admin_type:PH" is much better than the place+[country code] tag, I'll drop this proposal, and also escalate this matter with WikiProject Philippines.--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 13:01, 3 May 2016 (UTC) There is no "admin_type" tag documented in the wiki. The place tag is also used to tag administrative designated places, like provinces, municipalities, counties, etc. You possibly did not look up more on the place=* article, that place types does not only apply to populated areas, but also administrative designated places, as on the case of provinces, counties, states, municipalities, etc. Certain administrative designated place types exist in the Philippines, like what I specified.

Municipality, district, barangay, sitio, and purok are considered administratively designated places, not just status. Poblacion, is, however, not a type of administrative designation, but a common designation of the downtown area of a city or the center of the municipality, equals to a US county seat.--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 13:23, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

There's no such de facto state for the large conventions used to distinguish language codes from country codes in tags.

And there is not a lot of data to change (about 3000 nodes is nothing, it can be done in one minute, jsut like when we upload some new river or improve the coast line of an island), so "very common use" is false for this newly introduced tag that was never discussed before. It will also have a very small impact (if none) on existing renderers that ignore it (the tag is only there for specific selections of data or for detailed informations about random objects; it may also be helpful for creating custom reports and to track progresses).

Also consider that "place" is not the best key for an administrative status, "place" is a OSM classification broadly based on population, I suggested "admin_type" to complement the existing OSM "admin_level".

"admin_type" is documented per country that need it, and followed by an uppercase code. It has been also discussed since long on pages about admin_level and boundaries for some countries.

Thanks. — Verdy_p ^(talk) 13:28, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

To clarify matters, I noted that these Philippine place types (municipality, district, barangay, sitio, purok, etc.) are not just administrative status, but they also refer to populated places specific to my country.--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 03:10, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Probably you make confusions about the meaning of "administrative status". Or want to aply too much restriction. In all I read from you, you've not explained exactly what was the difference.

Places don't need to have a admin_level defined or to match one or and only one (e.g. place=village may match several admin_levels in many countries, not all having a local form of government (most places with admin_level 10 or higher in fact don't have any form of local goverment, but they may still be considered as administrative units for development purpose, and be given some distinctive "status" by a parent unit.

This role may be administrative, or educational, or for health, justice, or religion; in which case they'll be condidate for definitions of boundaries with the relevant boundary=* value (not just boundary=administrative which has admin_level=*).

But has a place based on broad population (or households) the existing place=* values are very limited in OSM (city, town, village, hamlet, isolated_dwelling, locality), plus subdivisions of cities and town (suburb, borrough). Those levels are generally mapped with an administrative level in OSM, but independantly of the population as it reflects the adminsitratrive hierarchy (more or less because there are some cases where the hierarchy is not strictly a tree and a unit at higher level may have some parts in several parent units, due to separation of powers and competences between the effective administrative units at different levels).

But in all what 'ive seen above from you, I see nothing that would not define an administrative unit, when instead you are refering to them confusingly as "places". If the {municipality, district, barangay, sitio, purok, etc.} have an administrative level in the hierarchy, define them with "boundary=adminitrative"+"admin_level=n" and you can still add "admin_type:PH=*" for the more specific status. If those "places" have these official denominations without any official administration, you can still define place={city|town|village|hamlet...|locality} but no admin_level=*, but still you can add "admin_type:PH=*"; if those places have no administrative role and no official denomination (only old or former traditional terminology), the tag will not be what you want but will be something like "disused:admin_type:PH=*" (see Key:disused:), but technically "admin_type:PH=*" would still work because those places won't have any "admin_level=*" mapped anywhere and will just be mere nodes, with place={suburb|borrough|village|hamlet|locality} depending on population and on their locattion within a populated place with an adminsitrative unit.

Reread the description you wrote yourself in the page: all these units were mapped with "admin_level=11", which is fine independantly of their OSM populated status of village and neighborhood; what you propose is not to change "place=village" or "place=neighborhood", and not to change the "admin_level=11", but add a tag for helping disctions between several types of units at the same "admin_level=11" (or possibly at different admin_level): this is perfectly the role of "admin_type:<COUNTRYCODE>=*". — Verdy_p ^(talk) 10:56, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

The difference between place is that they are based on population, while, admin_type=[country code] defines administrative status. It's now clear for me. But, regarding the case of city/municipal districts, and sitios and puroks, which has no official administration unlike the barangay, they are still mapped with an admin_level of 7 or 8 and 11, but I will use admin_type:PH=district, admin_type:PH=sitio or admin_type:PH=purok on them.

I'll drop this proposed tag place:ph in place of admin_type:PH, and soon make changes to the Philippine LGU's page and other related pages. But, I still do not know whether WikiProject Philippines will agree upon those changes, but, usually, they are approved quickly. --TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 14:08, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

This will be likely reserved to a few Philippine-specific places, like poblacion, subdivision, compound, etc. But for administrative place types, they must be tagged admin_type:PH instead--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 14:23, 5 May 2016 (UTC)