Get a sneak peek at whats next for Permanent Hazards on our April 7th Office Hours!
Post by dknight212
Twister_UK wrote:Agree with using the locality names rather than the generic London, and with removing any (London) suffixes where present and where possible. I'll only include the suffix when I'm editing an area which suffers a name clash with somewhere else in the UK, and like richardjeeves I've also been removing them from those areas of NW London which currently have it but don't need it.
Have you seen any decent OS place names for London?
dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message

Post by dknight212
Twister_UK wrote:Unfortunately not, as whilst the OS data provides three levels of area naming (City -> Borough -> Locality), the latter is far far too finely grained to be of any use for our needs - often the locality will only cover a handful of streets, with several such localities covering the area pretty much all of us would associate with a completely different locality name.

e.g. the area we'd probably all describe as South Hampstead (and which is marked as such in the OS Opendata viewer), apparently consists of the much smaller areas Frognal & Fitzjohns, Belsize, Swiss Cottage etc. etc.

Hmm, now I think about it some more, I wonder if plotting each of these areas on the map might at least give us a better idea as to where the more commonly accepted area boundaries lie...
So are the OS localities close in size to parishes?
dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message

Post by dknight212
Twister_UK wrote:I'm a muppet... they're the wards, as shown in the Opendata viewer when you select the appropriate boundary overlay.
And wards won't be good enough, agreed? I'll do some googling for other sources.
dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message

Post by dknight212
or could we draw our own rough areas on a google map somewhere to see if we can agree?
dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message

dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message

Post by dknight212
dknight212 wrote:Is the OS 1:50000 scale gazetteer any use?

https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/openda ... ducts.html
It's not perfect (as it contains some attractions which would need editing out) but it might help. I've downloaded a copy if someone wants to view it. Works quite nicely as an off-line "city" name checker.
dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message

Post by dknight212
Easy enough to edit out the non locality data as there's a feature type field. We would want c (city), t (town) and o (other locality).

David using Tapatalk
dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message

Post by dknight212
Let's wait a week or so for other comments before proceeding with anything. If anyone wants to force a vote on this or the other London issues I'm ok with that.
dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message

Post by dknight212
London is an odd place! Is City of London too long?

David using Tapatalk
dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message

Post by dknight212
Arrrrggggghhhhh!

David using Tapatalk
dknight212
Posts: 4962
Has thanked: 367 times
Been thanked: 603 times
Send a message