NIG (NoteInfoGenerator)

eddydevries · Post by **eddydevries** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 6:03 pm

Quizmaster wrote:I'm sorry, I should have posted before I started...

Don't be sorry.

Because of my lack of time I haven't spent much time in it (This week I thought 'I have to continue the list sometimes'), so it's no waste of time (if you ment this).

BaliBennie · Post by **BaliBennie** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 6:49 pm

Quizmaster wrote:I had a little time on my hands (I mean: I was bored out off my skull) and I started working on a codes_luxembourg file.

Hope no one else is actively working on it right now... double work would be a shame.

I know that Yli~ is also very busy with his Luxembourgian file. He too might not be far from completion..... I am working with his uncompleted file at the moment as can be seen in my NIG-stats

Quizmaster · Post by **Quizmaster** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:43 pm

It looks complete. Why isn't it published?

It could have been published already since the cantons and districts are in place!

Maybe yli can indicate how far he is? I may still have use for a part of my work, so it should be ok anyhow. And I learned to use some new text and database tools in the progress.

It may also be a good idea to get a little developers area on the site to see who's doing what.

BaliBennie · Post by **BaliBennie** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:55 pm

Don't throw your work away! Maybe some of your stats are better or can be merged by some users with other LUX-codes

Quizmaster · Post by **Quizmaster** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:03 pm

No, I won't throw anything away. Even if my work were completely redundant I wouldn't feel too bad about it. Next time when I'm bored and I don't feel like some of the things I normally do (including EBT-ing), I'm just going to read a book again.

yli · Post by **yli** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:05 pm

Well, I will only publish my codes_luxemburg.txt when it's completely finnish. I got the raw data (from 2 sources) partly compared to EPT.lu (see links EBT). The distrikts and cantons are finished, only some municipalities have to be put into NIG codes (from around 5000 to 9999)

The remarkable thing about Luxemburg is that there are a lot of postal codes, but still some postal codes consist of villages of different municipalities (and in the worst case - 7634 of all three Luxemburgian distrikt

). So, in such cases the location name has to be used in combination with the postal code. Also not simple in Luxemburg, where French and Luxemburgian (Lëtzebuergs) are the official languages - but German is also very common. So, to put it in other words - the locations have to be named in three languages.

....and an other nice example is postal code 8831 Randschelt (Rindschleiden),

déi klengsten Uertschaft aus dem Land. Awunnerzuel:1 (smallest village in Luxemburg - population 1)

Quizmaster · Post by **Quizmaster** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:28 pm

yli wrote: The remarkable thing about Luxemburg is that there are a lot of postal codes, but still some postal codes consist of villages of different municipalities (and in the worst case - 7634 of all three Luxemburgian distrikt ).

That's exactly what I've encountered. I've already used xxxx;<Name> in multiple instances.

So, in such cases the location name has to be used in combination with the postal code. Also not simple in Luxemburg, where French and Luxemburgian (Lëtzebuergs) are the official languages - but German is also very common. So, to put it in other words - the locations have to be named in three languages.

Wow, you're a purist!

If I were to complete it, it would be French/default names only (from my limited sources it seems like some muncipalities have a Lëtzebuergesh name by default (like Préizerdaul in Redange and Kiischpelt in Wiltz)) but the rest would just be French.

Also the location name in Lëtzebuergesh (in BaliBennies statistics) had my jaw drop. Good work!

....and an other nice example is postal code 8831 Randschelt (Rindschleiden), déi klengsten Uertschaft aus dem Land. Awunnerzuel:1 (smallest village in Luxemburg - population 1)

I don't know if that's named in my main source, which is probably the same as yours (mentioned somewhere on the EBT forum, a list somebody posted on another forum)

I also used EPT.lu for some doubtful cases.

I already ordered all postal codes from one source (the same I mentioned in the previous paragraph) according to village, and grouped by muncipality. For the "muncipalities of Luxembourg" to work, villages of 8 of the 12 Cantons only need to be renamed to the names of the muncipalities, and some doubles need to be sorted out (could be sone fairly quickly with a spreadsheet program with "Sort data" capacity and EPT.lu). If you're interested in a file, let me know.

yli · Post by **yli** » Wed Feb 21, 2007 11:03 pm

Quizmaster wrote:I don't know if that's named in my main source, which is probably the same as yours (mentioned somewhere on the EBT forum, a list somebody posted on another forum)

Unfortinatly that list isn't totaly complete. So, I googled around and found another list. But also that list isn't perfect. I mixed both info, and corrected it with EPT.lu (esp. in cases of changing municipalities)

Quizmaster · Post by **Quizmaster** » Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:22 am

yli wrote:
Quizmaster wrote:I don't know if that's named in my main source, which is probably the same as yours (mentioned somewhere on the EBT forum, a list somebody posted on another forum)
Unfortinatly that list isn't totaly complete. So, I googled around and found another list. But also that list isn't perfect. I mixed both info, and corrected it with EPT.lu (esp. in cases of changing municipalities)

Bummer.

Thanks for the great effort! I am really looking forward to the complete file!

Mr Euro · Post by **Mr Euro** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:04 am

I think I found a miscalculation:

On the summaryhits.html page header "Average kilometres by value on note". The average 20-note distance doesn't calculate right. I calculate by hand I get a much smaller distance. The same goes for the average days for 20 euro.

I checked the 50 euro and both seem right. Very strange

yli · Post by **yli** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:13 pm

After some days of working through my data I complete a NIG codes file for Luxembourg

It contains :

3 Districts, 12 Cantons and 116 Municipalities

I used the languages : French (German) | Letzebuergian

JP Simões · Post by **JP Simões** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:56 pm

yli wrote:After some days of working through my data I complete a NIG codes file for Luxembourg

Thank you. That gives us a grand total of 34 different nations avaliable.

On other news, I've just noticed there is no codes_greece file.

I'll start creating one myself (maybe in March, if I have time) unless someone is doing/has already done that.

DrGreenTom · Post by **DrGreenTom** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:13 pm

do i understand correctly the "Number of notes by location" is derived directly from the CSV file while p.ex. the Municipalities of Belgium statistic is madfe via NIG ?
(i'm trying to figure out why there's a diffference in both statistics, probably my typos :i would be an easy way to figure them out this way ...)

yli · Post by **yli** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 12:31 am

That's correct. So, if you've made a type with a postal code (or there is a type in the codes_belgium.txt) there could be a difference.

But remember, not all locations in Belgium are an independent municipality

pjr05 · Post by **pjr05** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:29 am

yli (2006-06-22) wrote:There is a mistake in the municipalities of The Netherlands. The following line in codes_netherlands.txt
Code: Select all
1749,1749=Bergen (NH)
Must be replaced with:
Code: Select all
1749,1749=Harenkapsel
So, that Warmenhuizen will be calculated as part of the municipality of Harenkapsel.

The name of that municipality is spelled as Harenkarspel.
So it should be:

Code: Select all

1738=Harenkarspel
1744,1749=Harenkarspel