Metro areas

[Ryan Levering-2]

Is there any place in geonames for "Metro Areas".  For instance,
"Tampa Bay" is a used semantic aggregation of Tampa, Florida, US with
other cities around the bay.  It is not a legitimate or technical
government division but it is definitely something that refers to an
area.  On the other hand, it might be confusing to have seemingly
repetitive Metro Area placemarkers for most large cities.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GeoNames" group.
To post to this group, send email to geonames@...
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geonames+unsubscribe@...
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geonames?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Marc Wick]

I guess you are interested in the relation between the metro area and
the aggregated cities. A hierarchical relation is so far only supported
for administrative divisions.

Ryan wrote:

> Is there any place in geonames for "Metro Areas".  For instance,
> "Tampa Bay" is a used semantic aggregation of Tampa, Florida, US with
> other cities around the bay.  It is not a legitimate or technical
> government division but it is definitely something that refers to an
> area.  On the other hand, it might be confusing to have seemingly
> repetitive Metro Area placemarkers for most large cities.
>
> >
>
>  

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GeoNames" group.
To post to this group, send email to geonames@...
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geonames+unsubscribe@...
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geonames?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Ryan Levering-2]

Actually, I'm not interested in the hierarchy.  Or at least that's not  
my main goal.  I just want to have this information in the DB  
associated with locations.  So if there was something called "Tampa  
Bay" or "Greater London", etc. with a marker roughly center of the  
overall area and a feature class of something appropriate, that would  
be fine.  Then it would be in the DB and make sense to a query for  
that location.  It seems weird that "Tampa Bay" doesn't show up in the  
data, but I can find random store buildings in there.  But they aren't  
as discrete as the current types of locations, so it might make the  
data more subjective.

On Jun 22, 2009, at 12:48 AM, Marc Wick wrote:

>
> I guess you are interested in the relation between the metro area and
> the aggregated cities. A hierarchical relation is so far only  
> supported
> for administrative divisions.
>
> Ryan wrote:
>> Is there any place in geonames for "Metro Areas".  For instance,
>> "Tampa Bay" is a used semantic aggregation of Tampa, Florida, US with
>> other cities around the bay.  It is not a legitimate or technical
>> government division but it is definitely something that refers to an
>> area.  On the other hand, it might be confusing to have seemingly
>> repetitive Metro Area placemarkers for most large cities.
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> >

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GeoNames" group.
To post to this group, send email to geonames@...
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geonames+unsubscribe@...
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geonames?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Marc Wick]

There is no feature code for metropolitan areas. There are three more
generic codes for areas:

AREA area a tract of land without homogeneous character or boundaries
RGN region an area distinguished by one or more observable physical or
cultural characteristics
RGNE economic region a region of a country established for economic
development or for statistical purposes

http://www.geonames.org/export/codes.html

I guess RGNE (economic region) comes closest to what you need.

Best

Marc

Ryan Levering wrote:

> Actually, I'm not interested in the hierarchy.  Or at least that's not  
> my main goal.  I just want to have this information in the DB  
> associated with locations.  So if there was something called "Tampa  
> Bay" or "Greater London", etc. with a marker roughly center of the  
> overall area and a feature class of something appropriate, that would  
> be fine.  Then it would be in the DB and make sense to a query for  
> that location.  It seems weird that "Tampa Bay" doesn't show up in the  
> data, but I can find random store buildings in there.  But they aren't  
> as discrete as the current types of locations, so it might make the  
> data more subjective.
>
> On Jun 22, 2009, at 12:48 AM, Marc Wick wrote:
>
>> I guess you are interested in the relation between the metro area and
>> the aggregated cities. A hierarchical relation is so far only  
>> supported
>> for administrative divisions.
>>
>> Ryan wrote:
>>> Is there any place in geonames for "Metro Areas".  For instance,
>>> "Tampa Bay" is a used semantic aggregation of Tampa, Florida, US with
>>> other cities around the bay.  It is not a legitimate or technical
>>> government division but it is definitely something that refers to an
>>> area.  On the other hand, it might be confusing to have seemingly
>>> repetitive Metro Area placemarkers for most large cities.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GeoNames" group.
To post to this group, send email to geonames@...
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geonames+unsubscribe@...
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geonames?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---