EuroBillTracker

androl wrote:

Gauss wrote:Coordinates for 88069 Obereisenbach had already been entered ahead, when someone generated the location 88069 Tettnang-Obereisenbach, the two corresponding city profiles were simply merged. Such Kuhkäffer take up enough time, and merging is much faster than copying coordinates.

I don't understand. But this tells me, "88069 Obereisenbach" has coordinates and "88069 Tettnang-Obereisenbach" does not.

That's basically what I said above, isn't it?

androl wrote:And the profiles (1,2) are not merged.

Right.

androl wrote:(should be merged to 104275)

Wrong. The profile 1 is for a different Kuhkaff, with postal code 66887. There is also 3, Luxembourg, the likely reason why the two german placed have been entered ahead.

androl wrote:That means, the note report map heuristics knows that "88069 Obereisenbach" matches best for "88069 Tettnang-Obereisenbach" and takes that location's coordinates, and since the coordinates are exact, it means that it only takes "88069 Obereisenbach" and not "88069 Tettnang"?

No, that's not the map heuristics. That's a someone who decided to join T.-O. with O. rather than with T. As you will have noticed, I don't have a strategy to the "kuhkaff problem". Merging by German municipalities might be a solution, but the sheer size of Germany, combined with the existence proud villages that consider themselves strictly distinct from the village that administers them, and forumers with a tendency to utmost precision, is likely to render this approach infeasible. As there are plenty of other areas, things, etc. to consider I'm not likely to comment on this matter in much further detail for the next days or so.

okay, if I had not read the "faster" as a "slower", I'd have understood the point
so that means the note report map now takes the average of the coordinates of all locations (also 0/0 ones) in the city profile, if the entered location does not yet have coordinates.

but now after I ( ) temporarily made "88069 Obereisenbach" a 0/1 location (notes/users), there still isn't a map in the city profile!?
so does it mean that not only 0/0 but all 0/* locations are not taken for the map?

androl wrote:but now after I ( ) temporarily made "88069 Obereisenbach" a 0/1 location (notes/users), there still isn't a map in the city profile!?
so does it mean that not only 0/0 but all 0/* locations are not taken for the map?

No, that means that you experienced a caching effect. The current timeout for city coordinate data is 2 hours.

Gauss wrote:Ullgive, please review your list yourself. A lot of the items on your list have been done already - it's been a week of very busy nights -, and it seems infeasible to check each item on your list whether or not it needs still (or again) attention. All profile numbers have changed since the Beta test anyway.

Ullgive wrote:Will do, just be patient

OK, now it's time for my update of all the Polish cities from the list for the country Poland that were still spelled wrong:

- Czestochowa (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=19712) should be spelled Częstochowa

- Nowy Tomysl (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=68866) should be spelled Nowy Tomyśl

- Slubice (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=92588) should be spelled Słubice

- Doluje (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=21987) should be spelled Dołuje

- Szamotuly (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=103269) should be spelled Szamotuły

- Dąbrowa tarnowska (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=117970) should be spelled Dąbrowa Tarnowska

- Swiecie (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=103221) should be spelled Świecie

- Janów lubelski (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=43826) should be spelled Janów Lubelski

- Swiecko (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=103222) should be spelled Świecko

- Boleslawiec (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=11839) should be spelled Bolesławiec

- Kedzierzyn-kozle (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=46097) should be spelled Kędzierzyn-Koźle

- Czeladz (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=19711) should be spelled Czeladź

- Dolne Krajnik (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=21979) should be spelled Krajnik Dolny

- Kolbaskowo (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=48827) should be spelled Kołbaskowo

- Strykow (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=102633) should be spelled Stryków

- Bei podrosche (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=8724) is NOT a Polish city but if you know the postcode you can maybe change the name to the proper one because it already shows on the map

- Ochotnica górna (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=70540) should be spelled Ochotnica Górna

- Orlowo (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=71669) should be spelled Orłowo

- Pila (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=74759) should be spelled Piła

- Poz (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=118400) is NOT a Polish city but I’m pretty sure it’s short for Poznań because it’s also the official code for the airport in this city; you can maybe check the postcode as well

- Tomaszów lubelski (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=105201) should be spelled Tomaszów Lubelski

- Zielona-góra (http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=117144) should be spelled Zielona Góra

Ullgive wrote:A little bit about the spelling of all the POLISH cities from your database, OK? Posted this a couple of weeks ago so now again but will also try to update it.

- Ruda slaska (http://beta.miuku.net/profile/?city=35111) should be spelled Ruda Śląska

- Sokolow podl (http://beta.miuku.net/profile/?city=35186) should be spelled Sokołów Podlaski

- Wolow (http://beta.miuku.net/profile/?city=35350) should be spelled Wołów

Here above is a part of my old list which is not valid now but I've got a question about it... Why did some of the cities disappear from it and aren't there now at all in the proper version?

I was typing a long list of erros I found in Dutch towns when Firefox crashed
Before I am going to do all the searching again, is this something I should post here?

MDeen wrote:I was typing a long list of erros I found in Dutch towns when Firefox crashed
Before I am going to do all the searching again, is this something I should post here?

Yes.... but FVS posted a list on page 2 about dutch locations

...with a bit of a discussion about some locations

yli wrote:

MDeen wrote:I was typing a long list of erros I found in Dutch towns when Firefox crashed
Before I am going to do all the searching again, is this something I should post here?

Yes.... but FVS posted a list on page 2 about dutch locations

...with a bit of a discussion about some locations

Ah, hadn't seen that one. I think that covers it then.

Please put Sankt Martin (67487), Germany to St. martin (ID 97406) and change the name of ID 97406 to "St. Martin". Thanks...

http://www.eurobilltracker.eu/profile/?city=81788 is at least
27356 Rotenburg (Wümme)
36199 Rotenburg an der Fulda

magpie wrote:Please put Sankt Martin (67487), Germany to St. martin (ID 97406) and change the name of ID 97406 to "St. Martin". Thanks...

Shouldn't that be Sankt Martin ?

yli wrote:
Shouldn't that be Sankt Martin ?

St. Martin is a very common form of the name of this village. It's even used on the website www.sankt-martin.de

The official name might be Sankt Martin or even Sankt Martin (Pfalz). I don't know how to find this out

Neither do I ... I never use shortings like St. (but Sint, Sankt, Saint etc. - depending of the country's language

Wikipedia says that this site tells you the "official" name including any abbreviations. There you have "Sankt Martin".
But many people write out all names that are "officially" abbreviated or shorten names that are written out. There's not much of a difference, the decision of the city council, what is the name of the city, is often an arbitrary decision.

For example we have the cities
Leutkirch, which is officially called Leutkirch im Allgäu
Immenstadt, which is officially called Immenstadt i.Allgäu
No-one makes this distinction in real life, and the German Wikipedia decided that these abbreviations are always written out in Wikipedia articles' names, so i.Allgäu -> im Allgäu and i.d.OPf. -> in der Oberpfalz
then some people decided not to accept this and fight for the right of the city to decide whether their name is im Allgäu or i.Allgäu.

Xunqueira ambía and Xunqueira de ambía are bound to be the same city, like Xunqueira de espadanedo and Xunqueira espadanedo.

This is not however particularly annoying.

EDIT: Someone up there works fast!