Admin_level=9 in Norway

Hello, and apologies for the post in English.

I operate an app which is a data consumer of administrative boundaries. While processing Norway boundaries, I discovered that there are some admin_level=9 boundaries with tagging that indicates that the boundary is no longer valid. For example, Rennesøy and Finnøy.

Other than the note tag, there is no obvious way for a machine to know that these are no longer valid boundaries. I only want to consume boundaries that still exist, not old ones :slight_smile: How should I interpret these objects? Could they be re-tagged as something else, like boundary=historic perhaps?

Thank you!

1 Like

I thought that any “was” tag would be sufficient - ref was:place. Any reason your app can’t use that?

The was:xzy tag only applies to the key that you put it on. It’s completely valid, for example, to have was:place=town and place=city on the same object. It would be that “this used to be a town but now it is a city”. It also says nothing about other tagging. So the current combination on these objects would mean “it’s currently an administrative boundary which used to be a municipality”. To capture the fact that something used to be an administrative boundary, you would want to replace boundary=administrative with was:boundary=administrative. Otherwise the intent is lost.

Now, for my specific problem, I just did an overpass query and found that all of the admin_level=9 in Norway have that was:place tag, so that tells me I can just ignore level 9 in Norway for the purpose of my app. But, I would recommend some type of tagging change above so that the next data user isn’t confused.

1 Like

Maybe it should be “historical” instead of “was” (the boundary).

1 Like

Thank you for the explanation, @ZeLonewolf, and sorry for wasting your time.

@Wulfmorn: Looking at the wiki the only option seems to be was:boundary=administrative, but I might have overlooked somethings.

Rennesøy and Finnøy is historic municipalities (admin_level=7), as the note suggest, but new boroughs (admin_level=9) have been created in their place, under the city of Stavanger. The same relations has simply been reused. Perhaps new ones should have been crated instead.

You should check your overpass query. Here is a relation with admin_level=9 without a was:place tag in the same city: Relation: ‪Hillevåg‬ (‪1312723‬) | OpenStreetMap.

1 Like

Ah, oops. Looks like the colon in the tag key messed up my query. Thanks for pointing that out! Guess things are more complicated than I thought.