Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 7, 2019. It is now read-only.

Standardize cities naming convention #227

Open
ustroetz opened this issue May 12, 2015 · 4 comments
Open

Standardize cities naming convention #227

ustroetz opened this issue May 12, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

@ustroetz
Copy link
Contributor

US cities are missing the country name. I understand that some cities in the US have the same name, like portland_oregon and portland_maine, but I think the naming should still be consistent and we should add the country too.

My suggestion is to use name_state_country. While state can be optional. Any thoughts on that?

@hkrishna
Copy link

Yes, I think adding country to all the names is a good idea. Its always nice to have a consistent naming convention. Maybe we could use alpha3 values for countries?

And state could be optional - we only use it for cases like portland - portland_oregon_usa portland_maine_usa

@louh
Copy link

louh commented May 21, 2015

@thatdatabaseguy is generating a manifest for OpenVenues datasets that contains metadata fields, including country name. I'm not sure what's generating it, but here is the result: http://s3.amazonaws.com/openvenues-static-public/cities/manifest.json

I believe the boundaries for OpenVenues is now using the same bboxes as the Metro Extractor, so we have a common interest on this.

@souperneon
Copy link
Member

Hi Uli,

At Mapzen, we just introduced an on-demand feature to make it easier and faster get custom extracts of places all over the world. Give it a try!

We are still testing it with people and would love it if you could give us your feedback by participating in a short usability study for the new experience. Let us know! You can also send us your feedback anytime at [email protected]

Thanks,
Ekta.

@ustroetz
Copy link
Contributor Author

Wow that's great @souperneon! Very excited to check it out.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants