Changes EUP poland constituencies

[sguenther85]

We have noticed that Poland has changed its constituencies again. Not the number, but the whole naming of them. These also no longer match 2019, which was the only information we had at the time.

https://wybory.gov.pl/pe2024/pl/okregi

[sguenther85]

@jloutsenhizer

[jloutsenhizer]

It's interesting that the Official Polish websites have switched how they're referring to these constituencies. Also interestingly, this appears to be more in line with how Offical EU parliament sources referred to them as well (2004 election source): https://www.europarl.europa.eu/elections2004/ep-election/sites/en/yourvoice/pl/law.html

It might make sense for these to be aliases for the originally submitted names to be aliases for the udpated names since they appear to have both been used to refer to these same districts in the past, but I'll leave that decision to your judgement.

[sguenther85]

It's interesting that the Official Polish websites have switched how they're referring to these constituencies. Also interestingly, this appears to be more in line with how Offical EU parliament sources referred to them as well (2004 election source): https://www.europarl.europa.eu/elections2004/ep-election/sites/en/yourvoice/pl/law.html

It might make sense for these to be aliases for the originally submitted names to be aliases for the udpated names since they appear to have both been used to refer to these same districts in the past, but I'll leave that decision to your judgement.

I believe that an "alias" is not necessary in this case because we have not yet used it to represent an election here and these were also submitted for the first time 3 months ago for exactly this intended election.

[jpmckinney]

Should we use the number after Nr in the ID? The IDs right now are kind of meaningless anyway, so might as well abbreviate.

[sguenther85]

@jpmckinney

Should we use the number after Nr in the ID? The IDs right now are kind of meaningless anyway, so might as well abbreviate.

i think that would have made problems for us here, because the numbers are still the same. That means we would have had the same numbers, but different names. That would then be difficult to represent historically in the ocd file, wouldn't it? Or du yo mean for example: ocd-division/country:pl/eup:8_województwo_lubelskie instead of ocd-division/country:pl/eup:województwo_lubelskie

But I basically agree with you that the current ids are not particularly nice, but I haven't found a useful alternative

[jpmckinney]

In general, a name can change without changing the identity of the political division.

Are the boundaries the same, or is basically nothing the same since 2019, other than the reuse of the numbers 1-13?

[sguenther85]

In general, a name can change without changing the identity of the political division.

Are the boundaries the same, or is basically nothing the same since 2019, other than the reuse of the numbers 1-13?

As far as I can see, the boundaries are the same in this case.

[jpmckinney]

Okay, then I assume their identity is the same, and it's just the name that changed (in Canada, Members of Parliament love to rename their electoral district – it's still the same district).

So, I would prefer to use the numbers in the ID – rather than create new OCIDs every time politicians decide they prefer a different name (without making any other substantive change to the division).

[jloutsenhizer]

This seems like a fair use of numbers, it's unclear how often the districts will change, but if they do redistrict and reuse the numbers for totally different districts we can take a similar approach that we did for Canada where we attach a year suffix to the IDs to give us unique ones

[sguenther85]

@jpmckinney @jloutsenhizer done