Talk:OGF:Area table

From OpenGeofiction Encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Vielen Dank, Thilo. Tolle Sache. Offensichtlich liegen die Knotenfehler an unterschiedlichen admin-leveln oder dass mal ein Stück Grenze fehlt. Mache mich gleich morgen an die Korrektur. --Histor (talk) 02:57, 2 September 2014 (CEST)

Yes, extremely useful and very cool. Thank you for the effort and support! I think I will start including more info in my relation names, however - specifying country on political subdivions e.g. "(MH) Rewk Mahhal Mohhoak". This would make database extracts like this searchable and sortable. Another idea would be to put that info in a 'ref' tag and you could include it in your extract query.--Ardisphere (talk) 03:22, 2 September 2014 (CEST)
A ref-tag is very useful. I always set this item. Meanwhile I have repaired some of the knot-mistakes (with boundary at admin-level = 4). I hope, at a second run then it is o.k. for the missing areas of the states. Lesser units will follow. ;-) --Histor (talk) 12:58, 2 September 2014 (CEST)
I agree this can be very useful, but for now i will stick to my own calculations for areas. My main reason is that territorial waters seem to be included, and to me that doesn't seem right for determining the sizes of countries etc.. For example my most eastern province of Dundham is almost doubled in area compared to my own calculations. But still it may help people to look for errors and for me, i added the maritime tags so next time i should see some X's to some provinces. --Antoon (talk) 17:01, 5 September 2014 (CEST)
The solution here is to create a second relation tagged as "land_area=administrative" that contains the land border and coastline segments of your country, like e.g. http://opengeofiction.net/relation/4 and http://opengeofiction.net/relation/582 (note that both relations appear in the table). --Thilo (talk) 18:58, 5 September 2014 (CEST)
Very nice birthday present! :) --Oxalia (talk) 19:20, 5 September 2014 (CEST)

Thank you very much for the update! --Mstr (talk) 22:22, 17 April 2016 (CEST)

Kann mich dem Dank nur anschließen --Histor (talk) 00:32, 18 April 2016 (CEST)

Zniwek-areas

Hi, some of my Areas seem to have broken nodes but I have no idea how to fix it... Can somebody help me with this? Repair it and explain me how did it happen and how to avoid this mistake in future? --Zniwek (talk) 01:40, 1 April 2015 (CEST)

Hello Zniwek = Which areas? Write please the numbers of the relation, which shall be repaired, that I can help you. --Histor (talk) 01:44, 1 April 2015 (CEST)
I see this nodes in the table, I hope I will find all: Goldsea Area 9393, 9403. Bridgecoast Area 9394, 9443. Greenlake Area 9404, 9407, 9408. Glassshade Area 9419. Castleness Area 9420, 9422, 9442. Floweredge Area 9423. Capital Area 9424, 9425, 9426. Highcloud Area 9427, 9428, 9449. Bluespell Area 9436. Oldlea Area 9437. Sunglow Area 9438. Redsnow Area 9439. Crystalhill Area 9440. Summermount Area 9441. I don't know if it somehow affects the map but I don't wanna see this problems :D Thanks Histor. --Zniwek (talk) 02:16, 1 April 2015 (CEST)

So I see, are some areas bound not in one, but in two (or more?) relations. So at knot 15 555 465 relation 3342 goes 2 ways = o.k., relation 9443 and 9455 at this point also two ways = here o.k., but "Greenlake area" has at one way the relation 9404 and at the second way 9408. So "Greenlake Area" has no full circle in one relation. Let me see, how the other areas are.

Needs some time, to analyze all that. If I repair today afternoon, all areas you named "area" is - so I see - "province" (wojwodina) with admin-level 4, the other with admin-level = 6. I tell you more, if I am ready with my work --Histor (talk) 13:58, 1 April 2015 (CEST)

I named it just Areas beacuse I didn't want to copy other names like Voivodeship, Province or State :) All should be admin-level=4. Maybe I made some mistakes :/ --Zniwek (talk) 14:22, 1 April 2015 (CEST)
Cookia, Ehillia and Learia are admin_level = 3 at boundary and relation. The areas I made admin_level = 4, as you did too. Please, do not work at the boundaries til today evening, then I will write a note --Histor (talk) 15:11, 1 April 2015 (CEST)
Cookia, Ehillia and Learia are Kingdoms and are higher boundary level. Thanks. I did this boundaries long time ago so I'm not editing them anyway now. --Zniwek (talk) 15:33, 1 April 2015 (CEST)

Hello Zniwek - I hope, it looks better now. Some of your provinces have had more than one relation - so the long "Capital area". I think, you deleted some boundaries, without to update the relations. So relations 9427, 9424, 9426, 9420, 9442 and 9404 are all this, who are more than the one at one area and now are not more in use.

Now you have 18 relatoins for your areas = 3342 for Chastchec itself, 9452 for Ehillia (CC_EH), 9455 for Coocia (CC_CO) and 9456 (CC_LE) for Leeria, the last 3 with boundaries at level 3. Then there are 14 relations for the areas. I give always a "ref"-tag like "CC_XX", where XX the same number is as in your wiki for Chastchec. Bidgecoast are two parts of land, so it has two relations (9443 and 9314). The others are = 2) Castleness 9422, 3) Greenlake 9408, 4) Floweredge 9423, 5)Glasshade 9419, 6) Capital 9425, 7) Summermount 9441, 8) Crystalhill 9440, 9) Redsnow 9439, 10) Highcloud 9428, 11) Bluespell 9436, 12) Oldlea 9437 and 13) Sunglow 9438. --Histor (talk) 00:18, 2 April 2015 (CEST)

I don't understand everything about relations yet but I'm sure that you made it more "professional" and less complicated and it won't be a problem anymore :) Probably I have made more lines than I used later so maybe that's what you're talking about here "I think, you deleted some boundaries, without to update the relations." I see all Area names on the map now. Thanks a lot Histor for your awesome help! --Zniwek (talk) 00:58, 2 April 2015 (CEST)

Ambiguous text

First it says:

The table is now generated daily

And then it says:

The aforementioned table is now generated only once a month

Which is it? It's a bit confusing. —tule00talk 16:03, 26 July 2019 (CEST)

Why not work for area calculation with this tool? [1] In the field you set in the number of the relation. So as I have seen, the update is immediatly after an edit. --Histor (talk) 16:13, 26 July 2019 (CEST)
Hi tule00, as far as I can remember, I added the second line (+ the link to the Relation are calculator) last year, because the Area table couldn't be generated on a daily basis anymore, for server resource issues, I believe. As a non-Admin, I opted to leave the first sentence as such, as it is an OGF-prefixed page. The Relation are calculator isn't updated immediately. You may need to wait between 5 minutes to a couple of hours depending on the servers' availability. Some relations can be accessed by their name, other only by their id. It seems that, recently, more relations are accessible by their name than previously, which is quite helpful. --Aiki (talk) 16:37, 26 July 2019 (CEST)
I just think that one of those sentences should be removed, that's all. But yes, the area calculator is quite useful. —tule00talk·contribs·OGF 12:44, 4 August 2019 (CEST)