From Wikishire
Revision as of 16:52, 1 September 2015 by Owain (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

I wonder if anyone can tell me why, on the 'interactive map', someone has clearly taken great trouble to display Cromartyshire accurately (even to the extent of remembering the division of Gruinard Island), but completely left out enormous portions of both Morayshire and Nairnshire (a smaller one of which is in the Black Isle), not to mention the detached portions of Banffshire situate on the East coast; all of these are much bigger than many of the tiny bits of Cromarty that have been included. To whoever is responsible, may I congratulate you on your excellent and painstaking portrayal of Cromartyshire, but also ask if these other Scottish counties could receive similarly accurate treatment? And the ones in England and Wales, too, for that matter. Unfortunately, I have no idea how the map works, or where it gets its data from; but I am very happy to assist in any way I can if someone were to tell me how. 552.08 (talk) 10:22, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

That is a good question. We had a good head-scratch over detached parts and referred to the Association of British Counties and the Historic Counties Trust about areas "locally situate" within a neighbouring county, and how they were considered before 1846. There is another optional layer to switch detached parts on, on the dropdown at the top of the map, which for Moray is here. RB (talk) 11:20, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Ah, thank you! I didn't notice that menu. I must say the map now looks quite superb. I was just looking at the Historic Counties Trust Maps on google earth, and marveling at their detail. I only mentioned it because, with Cromarty so detailed, it seemed unbelievable that the very same map put Dudley in Staffordshire. But now I see what you've done; you want to show Cramartyshire in its own right, but otherwise retain the Historic Counties Trust's standard 'A'? I do, however, think that there are a few more detached parts (such as Dudley, and Shipston-on-Stour, for example), that continued to be administered as part of their historic county well into the 20th century, and which, to this day, retain a strong local connections to that county, that perhaps deserve to appear on the default map. The HCT's two standards don't differentiate between the parts on the 1844 act's schedule and subsequent administrative changes to the parts not on the schedule (many of which are still well within living memory).
Yes that is the basic idea: A simple map with all detached parts shown as being part of the local county (Definition A), and a detailed one with them all shown separately (Definition B). However, in order to show all the counties, even on the basic map, one has to show Cromartyshire in all its glory. In addition, the Definition A map shows the two main parts of Flintshire and Dunbartonshire, which are considered separate parts of the main body. In essence the map either shows no detached parts (with the caveats mentioned above), or all of them -- the Historic Counties Standard treats both equally. Owain (talk) 13:52, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Anyway, please excuse my misunderstanding; I have quite literally only just discovered this site. Do keep up the good work! 552.08 (talk) 12:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
One little snag: it tells me 'Morayshire: Area: 492 sq mi.' on both maps. Obviously the areas with and without the detached parts ought to be somewhat different. 552.08 (talk) 12:16, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes, currently the database only has the area calculations made without detached parts. It is a trivial task to calculate the total area with them but the problem then becomes one of how to display it without causing confusion. It is certainly something I will look into. Owain (talk) 13:52, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
The code will now display the area total including the detached parts if you are currently looking at the map with a detached background layer. Owain (talk) 16:52, 1 September 2015 (UTC)