Page 22 of 67
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 6:03 pm
by eddydevries
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).
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 6:49 pm
by BaliBennie
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
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:43 pm
by Quizmaster
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.
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:55 pm
by BaliBennie
Don't throw your work away! Maybe some of your stats are better or can be merged by some users with other LUX-codes
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:03 pm
by Quizmaster
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.
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:05 pm
by yli
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)
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:28 pm
by Quizmaster
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.
Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 11:03 pm
by yli
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)
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:22 am
by Quizmaster
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!
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:04 am
by Mr Euro
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
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:13 pm
by yli
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
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 9:56 pm
by JP Simões
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.
Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:13 pm
by DrGreenTom
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 ...)
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 12:31 am
by yli
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
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:29 am
by pjr05
yli (2006-06-22) wrote:There is a mistake in the municipalities of The Netherlands. The following line in codes_netherlands.txt
Must be replaced with:
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