Latest posts for the topic "Palestine Capital - Jerusalem ???"

Palestine Capital - Jerusalem ???

artigas — GMT

Greetings Marc - Need a "PPLC" entry for Jerusalem. Thanks In Advance. Regards,

Re:Palestine Capital - Jerusalem ???

marc — GMT

Hi Robert I fear this is a politically open issue we cannot resolve and we should leave it as PPL. If we change it to PPLC for which country should this be? Palestine or Israel? Both parties consider it to be their capital. Best Marc

Re:Palestine Capital - Jerusalem ???

artigas — GMT

Greetings Marc - I looked at a map and saw that it sort of was divided in the middle. So for my database I created two individual geographic boundaries, one for each country. Right now the one geoname_id is assigned to both, so from my perspective you can choose to leave it alone. However, a political issue that defines a geographic boundary for quite an amount of time should be considered. Are not all geographic boundaries a choice driven by a political (backed by a military) entity? Kindest Regards,

Re:Palestine Capital - Jerusalem ???

samiam — GMT

On the subject, Latitude: 31.76729 (31° 46′ 2″ N) Longitude: 35.20569 (35° 12′ 20″ E) and the area around it returns Asia/Gaza even though it is on the Israeli side of the Green line.

Re:Palestine Capital - Jerusalem ???

asimov2 — GMT

Sorry to say this, but if your database is politically influenced and not based on facts it is not trustworthy at all. Not often you hear someone disputing that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

marc wrote:

Hi Robert I fear this is a politically open issue we cannot resolve and we should leave it as PPL. If we change it to PPLC for which country should this be? Palestine or Israel? Both parties consider it to be their capital. Best Marc

:cry: :cry:

Re:Palestine Capital - Jerusalem ???

artigas — GMT

Greetings - You are mistaken, I was not disputing that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel at all. That is an assumption or misunderstanding on your part. I stated that it was missing a capital. Marc explained the data and his reasoning. And I agree with Marc's reasoning and his decision. And for his implementation purposes he is correct. There is a line that divides Jerusalem in the middle. I am trying to reflect the current facts as they exist for ---my database purposes---. It is split, and it is so noted in my database implementation at the current time. It is unfortunate that it is a political line. I would prefer it was not that way. For the ---purposes--- I use this database, the choice to assign Jerusalem as both countries capitals is correct for now. When the conditions change (or I can figure out a way around it) I can make the adjustments, no muss, no fuss. "Trustworthy" by who's definition? There is quite a bit of data in the GEONAMES database implementation that can be more accurate, and I applaud Marc's efforts for his unending quest for more accuracy. There is the normal free implementation download and a premium paid implementation download with different levels of accuracy. Can accuracy be a factor of "trustworthy"? How many inaccuracies does it take to make a collection of facts not "trustworthy"? How many (politically decided) geographic administrative divisions being incorrect in the GEONAMES database makes the data not "trustworthy"? How many latitude-longitude points being incorrect and by what percentage of accuracy makes the data not "trustworthy"? How many postal codes missing from countries makes the data not "trustworthy"? And "who" decides? On my database implementation of the data, I am the one that decides. There is only ---one--- of those adjustments I had to make on the world capitals. So your assumption (if there was one, since the wording was not exactly clear) that I was letting other "political" decisions influence my geographical data collection would be incorrect and a generalization. And I should give any validity to your ---opinion--- of not "trustworthy", about a database whose purpose you have no knowledge of, for what specific reasons exactly? (Rhetorical question, I really do not need or want an answer). My current implementation might not be "trustworthy" for your purposes, but then ---you are not--- using this database. To each his own. Regards,

Re:Palestine Capital - Jerusalem ???

asimov2 — GMT

artigas wrote:

Greetings - You are mistaken, I was not disputing that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel at all. That is an assumption or misunderstanding on your part.

Greetings Artigas. Thank you for your response. My remark however was directect towards the comment of Marc in which he stated that Jerusalem could not be designated the capital of Israel because "Both parties consider it their capital". I agree that trustworthy is not the right word and certainly not very respectfull towards people devoting so much time on this project. I apologize. Still I think that it is an unnecessary inaccuracy in the database. Furthermore it is also not consistent with the data in the countryinfo table. Your remark that I am not using the database is not true (I also didn't say that). I am using the data, and I am also validating the data by parsing the wikipedia for names and coordinates. I still would like to ask Marc to reconsider the PPLC for Jerusalem. If, in a brighter future, there would be a country Palestine, it could have Jersusalem as PPLC as well.

Re:Palestine Capital - Jerusalem ???

artigas — GMT

Greetings - My apologies for mistaking the answer to Marc as an answer to me. I did not say, that you were not using the GEONAMES database. What I stated is quoted bellow with a slightly different emphasis.

My current implementation might not be "trustworthy" for your purposes, but then ---you are not--- using this database.

And by this I meant my specific database implementation. The GEONAMES database collection and Wikipedia are only two of the several sources of data that I have access to. And I had a "country info" file equivalent, before GEONAMES even existed. Every source I have access to, has inaccuracies in them in one form or another. I do not trust any of the single sources I have access to. And I cross verify more sources than I care to mention. In some cases, when none of the sources make sense for my purposes, I have to make a choice. For marc's "purposes" he made his choice of no capitals. And for his "purposes" I agree and accept his choice. For my "purposes" I chose two capitals. And documented the purpose for the choice. My "purposes" are different than Marc's. Between GEONAMES continent and country, I have a "continent area" implementation. That allows things like the Caribbean, Central America, Northern Asia. For my "purposes" I needed that. BTW: I sent Marc a spread sheet of that, but I do not expect him to ever implement it. For your "purposes" you are enhancing the lat-lon data with a different source. You made a choice. You did not accept "as is" the lat-lon data in GEONAMES. You really do not have to accept his capital implementation "as is" either. It is a choice. The database structures that I am working on were all the data finally goes to, looks nothing like GEONAMES. I deal with yearly populations and other additional facts that make that impossible. And it is a "dump the data" format. GEONAMES is one of the BETTER sources of data that I use. And I have a bit more confidence on it in certain areas because of the level of world-wide support it has and the number of people looking at it every day. It is somewhat an advantage over other geographic fact collections. To each his own database implementation. Good luck with your database implementation. Regards,