<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Latest posts for the topic "mexico city names duplicating... "]]></title>
		<link>http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/4.page</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Latest messages posted in the topic "mexico city names duplicating... "]]></description>
		<generator>JForum - http://www.jforum.net</generator>
			<item>
				<title>mexico city names duplicating... </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ <p></p>

		<cite>Cwheat503 wrote:</cite><br>
		<blockquote>
The only thing different about the 4 is the gtopo30  and date modified...
&nbsp;
		</blockquote>
No, the lat/lng are different.
<p></p>

		<cite>Cwheat503 wrote:</cite><br>
		<blockquote> One state can't have that many cities with the same exact names.&nbsp;
		</blockquote>
Why not? There is no universal law that would prevent this. People can call their cities however they like.

Marc]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/1257.page#5376</guid>
				<link>http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/1257.page#5376</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Sun, 8 Feb 2009 13:53:22]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ marc]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Re:mexico city names duplicating... </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ It has been a few days now with no response,  so really I am bumping this....  but do you agree that thier seems to be a problem of major roads, parks, monuments, and what not being wrongly marked as populated place?  or am I just crazy,  or running a wrong query against the DB?

Thank You...]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/1257.page#5399</guid>
				<link>http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/1257.page#5399</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 11 Feb 2009 04:25:57]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Cwheat503]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Re:mexico city names duplicating... </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ Your assumption that place names have to be unique is wrong. As for "Agua Caliente", you have just proven yourself that a place like this exists in the area of Tijuana.

Best

Marc]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/1257.page#5402</guid>
				<link>http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/1257.page#5402</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 11 Feb 2009 08:02:28]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ marc]]></author>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>Re:mexico city names duplicating... </title>
				<description><![CDATA[ If you read my entire posts with examples you would see "Agua Caliente" in tijuana... is not a populated place PPL it is a highway... yet the DB has it marked as a populated place... that is my point... the db is marking non populated places as a populated place...

Your db has the wrong feature codes and feature classes for many places...  Look at the one example I showed you (of many I found)

geoname_id: 4019564 
feature_code: PPL
feature_class: P

Tell me how a highway "Boulevard Agua Caliente" can be marked with those codes and be "correct"??? 

Looking at this example would you agree that your feature codes/classes are wrong?

If not does that mean all highways are marked with P and PPL?
]]></description>
				<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/1257.page#5403</guid>
				<link>http://forum.geonames.org/gforum/posts/list/1257.page#5403</link>
				<pubDate><![CDATA[Wed, 11 Feb 2009 08:23:54]]> GMT</pubDate>
				<author><![CDATA[ Cwheat503]]></author>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>