Site navigation

Discussion: Restructuration of france and its regions Started by Damian.

  • Public discussion France
  • Started: 9 months ago on Wed 27th Sep 2017

This is a public discussion in France.

Showing all 8 messages.

Damian started this discussion 9 months ago.

Restructuration of france and its regions

Hi all,

Recently, I started to complete the France data base, and I quickly realized that the current structure might not be the best. In my opinion, some restructuration of France would be needed. In that extend, I would propose to use the administrative region of France as a first level structure. They were recently merged, but I would use the previous region definition (prior to 2016) to avoid to many crags per regions. Some will still have many sub-area, but I am sure it would make the crag easier to find. I have a list of area that should be improved. A bit too long to describe them all here, but I am sure we would gain in clarity.

They might be an issue with some crag that close to the border of two regions. In that case, the best might be to keep the guidebook structure (not respecting the region boundaries) ? The other option is to stick to the region of location. What do you think?

An other point would be that some well known sector (Bleau for instance) would be attached to Ile-de-France, which might confuse people.

Does anyone has a reason to keep the current structure of France?


replied 9 months ago.

Thanks Damian for your propose.

In my opinion a first level of administrative regions is good as long as they are not to small. But for the next levels I would like to propose that we go with geographic areas like 'Écrins', "Vosges" .... Not local climbers very often have no idea about municipal structures.

Moving Bleau into a sup area is absolutely ok. There are almost no crags directly on country level anywhere in the world.


Damian replied 9 months ago.

Right concerning the area, this make more sense to keep the geographical area for the crags.

Damian replied 9 months ago.

I am still proceeding with the adjustment of the France indexes.

Ulfi and Nicky, do you think it would make sense to move the Alps and Ardeche region under the Rhone-Alpes region. Would this be too mess up , or would there be too many sub-area and crags under the Rhone-Alpes regions?

Similarly, I would like to merge the Southwest,Southeast and Pyrenees region under a more general region, called southwest. This would create a really large region, with many crags under it, but would be more adapted than the actual denomination.

replied 9 months ago.

Hi Damian

I thought you would create the 13 (mainland) regions:

as a first level. than that would mean that the current generic nodes like Southeast have to be split up and merged into the new level 1 nodes. I propose to get rit of "Alps" at all and move Ardech into the right sub node.

Make that sense? Nicky

replied 9 months ago.

I would not care to much about nodes with to many children right now. More important is a consistent structure. Most people find crags with the map tool, the internal or external search. Not to many do real index browsing.

A good index structure is more important for the people who would like to add new crags. they should have a good idea where to put the new crag. otherwise we will have many duplicates like now in France.

If we have a good second level like mountain ranges, National parks ... i do not think that we will have to many children in the level 1 nodes at all.

Damian replied 9 months ago.

Hey, Yes make sense, and I would prefer to follow the 13 mainland region. And then split the things.

I was just having a little doubt concerning the Pyrenees area that would be split on 2 region of France. But I doubt this would create a problem, and it would still be really easy to find the information on the map.

I will keep proceeding with the reconstruction in the following days to have something clearer.


Ulfi replied 9 months ago.

Great work, thanks!!!

Showing all 8 messages.

Selected sponsors