Yes, It has always been in my mind. Previous VDCs( admin_level=8) must be made invisible. I removed them in some districts and added Wards (admin_level=9).
I am very slow in editing boundary relations, it always creates conflicts with waterways since they are overlapped with admin boundaries.
Also, the Department of Survey, Nepal (NationalMappingOrganization) only provides free shapefile data upto Municipality level (admin_level=7), it doesn’t provide data of wards level (admin_level=9). But ward level data of some municipality can be found freely elsewhere may in their own websites.
I don’t think we can download thes admin boundary data from N-wash. But what can I do is I can write a letter to some officials of Survey Department for providing shapefile upto ward level.
Actually, wards don’t have name they have only numbers. Each rural municipality, urban municipality, sub-meteopolitan city and metropolitan city are divided into number of wards which are just numbers but they are simply named with the name of municipality. Example: Kathmandu-01, Kathmandu-02,… etc.
Also, one good news. I have received the shapefile for the whole country Nepal from one of the officials from Survey Department, Nepal
You can download and extract from this drive link:
This link might go dead after few days, so download as soon as you see this message.
Yes, I agree with the classification with additional name tag.
In context of Nepal, the ward numbers are actually used as names in combined with Municipality name. So, I think the ‘name’ tag should be filled with ‘Ward No. Value’.
.i.e.
type=boundary
boundary=administrative
admin_level=9
name= ‘MunicipalityName’-‘the number of the ward’
ward= ‘the number of the ward’
Example:
For boundary relation of ward no 1 of Kathmandu metropolitan city.
Can you share me the process of how do you edit such boundary relations. I feel I do that in quite complex way. You had once shared me the process of editing highways and that was very helpful. @Heinz_V
I mapped really a lot boundaries in India. And I personally do not merge boundaries to anything else.
Sometimes boundaries are defined in the middle of river/streams. But they can also be on the left or right bank of a river.
In heavy weather the waterways can change their course. But boundaries normally do not change.
If you make changes to boundaries which are merged to other objects, you really have to take care that you do not create conflicts. And newbies may not be able to handle conflicts.
Eberything concerning boundaries is much easier if they have separate ways.
Dear Anil, we had a very long discussion in the polish community and the result was: do not glue admin boundaires with anything. This because in that way the boundaries are safer: The probability to be destroyed by new users (especially iD users) is lower. I think we can use this good practice in Nepal as well.
Yes, I saw you changed all the boundary relations of admin_level= 8 to disused: boundary.
You did it for the whole country in very short time, is there a shortcut to do this at once for the whole country? If there’s shortcut please share . @Heinz_V
I think the ways with admin_level=8 can be converted into admin_level=9 one by one while adding ward level boundaries.