Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP
Yep have the email history and a copy is on its way to you directly. From: Delta Foxtrot To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Monday, 15 June, 2009 4:04:39 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP > I approached the Sunshine Coast Council (Qld) some months > ago about accessing their data and my request is still under > review. Currently they provide mapping data without > charge to commercial vendors (eg UBD). Did you file the request in writing, and if so do you still have a copy? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP
--- On Mon, 15/6/09, Jeff Price wrote: > I definitely agree external data sources > should be reviewed some how before being imported such that > anything currently in place remains as the authoritative > instance. I didn't mean to suggested that any govt provided data would be more or less accurate than what exists in the DB, but it wouldn't be any worst than landsat type quality. Unlike landsat I'd expect it would contain meta information such street/road names. > I approached the Sunshine Coast Council (Qld) some months > ago about accessing their data and my request is still under > review. Currently they provide mapping data without > charge to commercial vendors (eg UBD). Did you file the request in writing, and if so do you still have a copy? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP
For districts where its a blank map I feel there would be value in getting the gazetted road data. At least that way for the few hearty souls out there collecting data it becomes an exercise of refinement, instead of 'oh boy where to start'. I definitely agree external data sources should be reviewed some how before being imported such that anything currently in place remains as the authoritative instance. I approached the Sunshine Coast Council (Qld) some months ago about accessing their data and my request is still under review. Currently they provide mapping data without charge to commercial vendors (eg UBD). Jeff. From: Ross Scanlon To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Monday, 15 June, 2009 2:37:15 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP And the problem with importing things like roads from government databases is that they are the gazetted road position not the actual on ground road position. That's why google maps etc are so often incorrect. Thats why some of the ABS data does not line up with the actual plotted road. Here's an example http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-20.30721&lon=148.54535&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF The roads are in their current place but when they were gazetted the ABS boundary is there. You can still see where the Bruce Highway used to be if you go to this intersection. Cheers Ross On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:08:33 +1000 b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: > This is not to say that administrative borders aren't useful, but if I was in > a foreign country I'm much more interested in navigation, where to eat, where > the closest toilet is etc than what suburb I'm in or exactly where the border > of a national park is. > > So anyway, what I'm trying to get to is a consensus on what would be a more > efficient use of our time: marketing to the masses or petitioning for > government databases. > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP
--- On Mon, 15/6/09, Ross Scanlon wrote: > And the problem with importing things > like roads from government databases is that they are the > gazetted road position not the actual on ground road > position. That's why google maps etc are so often > incorrect. I realise the gazetted information will be inaccurate, you only have to glance at my emails on state borders. I also realise that landsat plotting is inaccurate due to both course imagery and incorrect alignment, I've noticed the alignment also changes depending where you have the map positioned before requesting yahoo sat images. What I've known for a long time is how beneficial the tiger data set has been to projects in the US, to accelerate interest if nothing else to fix the mistakes! Even though it's inaccurate it plots something, being picky over data in metro areas is fine because you have so many options to pick from, the same can't be said for all areas of the country. Additionally the Austrian govt has released data, they rationalised this because the data they get back in return would be more accurate, and the net cost of the loss of revenue verses the cost to aquire more accurate data is probably up there as well. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP
Additionally to this, it's also why I am loath to change the ABS data where they do not line up on a street. On the example below where is the correct ABS boundary. I would expect it to be as plotted by the mass import of the ABS data not where the roads are at present. Cheers Ross On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:37:15 +1000 Ross Scanlon wrote: > And the problem with importing things like roads from government databases is > that they are the gazetted road position not the actual on ground road > position. That's why google maps etc are so often incorrect. > > Thats why some of the ABS data does not line up with the actual plotted road. > > Here's an example > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-20.30721&lon=148.54535&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF > > The roads are in their current place but when they were gazetted the ABS > boundary is there. You can still see where the Bruce Highway used to be if > you go to this intersection. > > Cheers > Ross -- Ross Scanlon ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP
And the problem with importing things like roads from government databases is that they are the gazetted road position not the actual on ground road position. That's why google maps etc are so often incorrect. Thats why some of the ABS data does not line up with the actual plotted road. Here's an example http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-20.30721&lon=148.54535&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF The roads are in their current place but when they were gazetted the ABS boundary is there. You can still see where the Bruce Highway used to be if you go to this intersection. Cheers Ross On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:08:33 +1000 b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: > This is not to say that administrative borders aren't useful, but if I was in > a foreign country I'm much more interested in navigation, where to eat, where > the closest toilet is etc than what suburb I'm in or exactly where the border > of a national park is. > > So anyway, what I'm trying to get to is a consensus on what would be a more > efficient use of our time: marketing to the masses or petitioning for > government databases. > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP
Lets just think about the end goals of getting MPs involved: adding more data to the map. Now basically there seems to be 2 threads of argument about how best to do this: 1) Through mass import of external datasets and 2) through contributions by users. Method 1) is often required for things that can't be easily surveyed, such as administrative borders whereas method 2) tends to yield better results for things open to "rapid" (ie, static for <1-2 years) changes such as POIs and new housing developments. >From that basis one would then ask what is a higher priority for our part of >the world. In my opinion completion of street name surveys is probably the >highest priority, as once that's done OSM begins to look like a useful tool >for people who aren't interested in contributing, eg tourists, small >businesses etc. This is not to say that administrative borders aren't useful, but if I was in a foreign country I'm much more interested in navigation, where to eat, where the closest toilet is etc than what suburb I'm in or exactly where the border of a national park is. So anyway, what I'm trying to get to is a consensus on what would be a more efficient use of our time: marketing to the masses or petitioning for government databases. Personally I think that marketing to the masses would yield better results. Ie: organise more mapping parties where newbies are encouraged to attend and are introduced to a friendly, supportive atmosphere. Or get a few small regions "finished" and get some printed maps into tourist information centers and youth hostels. I dare say that small regions such as the Sydney CBD and Canberra would be excellent pilot projects which could be started right away. By getting lots of free maps out to the people it broadens our readership. Eventually I think it would be really awesome to get an OSM street directory onto bookshop shelves, starting with capital cities (or regional centers, as they're smaller goals) and eventually (in 5-10 years) publishing an "OSM touring guide", complete with a Wikipedia-like database of town descriptions, free camping sites etc, kind of like a compeditor to Explore Australia. Anyway, I've seriously rambled on here. I think that both general populace marketing and MP petitioning are needed, but if somebody has some spare time and a choice, what does Talk-Au think they should concentrate on? Brent - Original Message - From: Delta Foxtrot Date: Sunday, June 14, 2009 11:29 pm Subject: [talk-au] Petition to MP To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org > > I'm just wondering, nothing came up on google when searching, if > there is any example letters floating about petitioning MPs for > access to federal data and making it public domain. > > The reason I ask is the electorate, both state and federal, I'm > in is currently held by independents and they might be > sympathetic to the cause, or at least give lip service about it :) > > Just a thought, but previous letters that usually address non- > local specific issues tended to get forwarded to the relevant > ministers and form letters were replied. > > I believe the state member was formally the mayor of Armidale > council so he may have access to other resources, for that area > at least. > > Has anyone gone down this path before, if so what was the outcome? > > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Delta Foxtrot wrote: > I'm just wondering, nothing came up on google when searching, if there is > any example letters floating about petitioning MPs for access to federal > data and making it public domain. > > The reason I ask is the electorate, both state and federal, I'm in is > currently held by independents and they might be sympathetic to the cause, > or at least give lip service about it :) I am involved in political lobbying at times. Lots of issues pass these men and women, and one thing mentioned is easily lost. But things which are happening in common across many electorates will get talked about in the lunch rooms and party rooms, and this gives an impression of a groundswell of public opinion. So we would all need to be doing this at about the same time - writing individual letters or emails - if we want to have an effect. I've been cautious lately in asking for information, waiting for the licence debate to be settled. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Petition to MP
--- On Sun, 14/6/09, Paul Zagoridis wrote: > Pick up the phone and talk to your > local member AND the electoral staff. I know from previous correspondence on issues they always tell me to put it in a letter and send it to the member, luckily they also accept emails these days. > Educate them on the issue either face to face or later by > phone appointment. face to face would require a 3hr trip to Tamworth, or a 2 hr trip to Armidale, probably both if you want/need to see both. > THEN follow up with a letter that they expect. > > Don't bother with email as it is hard to track. > > Lastly a petition should only be started if you are willing > to drive it. > Better to lobby with your vested interest. By petition, I'm pretty sure I meant to petition the member informally, rather than some formal campaign, although we pay, indirectly, for the mapping information to be produced, so in turn they can turn round and charge/license the data out. Is it just me sick of being doubled, trippled or quadrupled taxed to death? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Petition to MP
I'm just wondering, nothing came up on google when searching, if there is any example letters floating about petitioning MPs for access to federal data and making it public domain. The reason I ask is the electorate, both state and federal, I'm in is currently held by independents and they might be sympathetic to the cause, or at least give lip service about it :) Just a thought, but previous letters that usually address non-local specific issues tended to get forwarded to the relevant ministers and form letters were replied. I believe the state member was formally the mayor of Armidale council so he may have access to other resources, for that area at least. Has anyone gone down this path before, if so what was the outcome? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Maritime boundaries
--- On Sun, 14/6/09, Darrin Smith wrote: > Yes, I'm fully aware of the 200nm official UN definition, I > just found > it interesting (hence the use of the term 'interestingly' > at the start > of the sentence there) that that page appeared to be in > error. I missed that, it's always mildly amusing to catch mistakes in official documents... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Maritime boundaries
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 06:02:18 -0700 (PDT) Delta Foxtrot wrote: > > --- On Sun, 14/6/09, Darrin Smith wrote: > > Interestingly that page I linked lists the Exclusive > > Economic Zone (the > > 200nm case) as extending from the outside of the 12nm > > limit, which > > would actually make it 212nm from the baseline case. > > An exclusive economic zone extends for 200 nautical miles (370 km) > beyond the baselines of the territorial sea, thus it includes the > territorial sea and its contiguous zone.[3] A coastal nation has > control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, > including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of > those resources. However, it cannot regulate or prohibit passage or > loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea, whether > innocent or belligerent, within that portion of its exclusive > economic zone beyond its territorial sea. Before 1982, coastal > nations arbitrarily extended their territorial waters in an effort to > control activities which are now regulated by the exclusive economic > zone, such as offshore oil exploration or fishing rights (see Cod > War). Indeed, the exclusive economic zone is still popularly, though > erroneously, called a coastal nation's territorial waters. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters#Exclusive_economic_zone Yes, I'm fully aware of the 200nm official UN definition, I just found it interesting (hence the use of the term 'interestingly' at the start of the sentence there) that that page appeared to be in error. -- =b ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Maritime boundaries
--- On Sun, 14/6/09, Darrin Smith wrote: > Interestingly that page I linked lists the Exclusive > Economic Zone (the > 200nm case) as extending from the outside of the 12nm > limit, which > would actually make it 212nm from the baseline case. An exclusive economic zone extends for 200 nautical miles (370 km) beyond the baselines of the territorial sea, thus it includes the territorial sea and its contiguous zone.[3] A coastal nation has control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources. However, it cannot regulate or prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea, whether innocent or belligerent, within that portion of its exclusive economic zone beyond its territorial sea. Before 1982, coastal nations arbitrarily extended their territorial waters in an effort to control activities which are now regulated by the exclusive economic zone, such as offshore oil exploration or fishing rights (see Cod War). Indeed, the exclusive economic zone is still popularly, though erroneously, called a coastal nation's territorial waters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters#Exclusive_economic_zone ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Maritime boundaries
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 04:59:36 -0700 (PDT) Delta Foxtrot wrote: > > --- On Sun, 14/6/09, Darrin Smith wrote: > > > The reason I chose to put in the (roughly estimated) 12nm > > boundary was > > that from the research I could find it's the *legal* > > definition of the > > extent of full australian territory, i.e. when you are > > inside 12nm you > > are in Australia and all laws apply - as is the case with > > most > > countries from what I could determine. The 200nm is to do > > with resource > > exploitation and full teritorial rights do not exist in > > this area. The > > other countries around where world where people have added > > maratime > > borders and been at the 12nm limit also from what I can > > see. > > I should have read up on it first I guess, but that's only partially > true. Since UN based conferences in the 1960s various nations have > signed up to various international treaties, that originally went > from 3nm, to 6nm, to 12nm and now various countries have put in > requests for recognition to 200nm, Australia being one of them. > > Exceptions in Australia's case exist where it meets territorial > waters with PNG and they have agreements in places as to who owns > what, and around several islands which only extend 3nm. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters > > What I can't figure out is if these treaties have been ratified and > Australia's submission for 200nm was/is accepted/valid, or what's > going on. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters#Submissions_with_recommendations The URL provided as a reference for all the maratime boundaries I entered makes it pretty clear that 12nm is our territorial water boundary, and references the Torrens Strait issue: http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/InternationalLaw_AustraliasMaritimeBoundariesandZones I never bothered going into heavy details in Torres Straight because getting that remotely accurate would require using maps provided by the gov. which of course raises the ugly issue of copyright. Too hard basket to translate all the written versions into meaninful maps, and too much chance of offending someone who lives up that way if I got it wrong ;) Interestingly that page I linked lists the Exclusive Economic Zone (the 200nm case) as extending from the outside of the 12nm limit, which would actually make it 212nm from the baseline case. Also if someone is interested in getting the 12nm truely accurate they'd need to look at the 'Internal Waters' cases because from some maps I've seen around the place there are quite a few bays classified as 'internal' which I didn't count as internal when I drew up the lines, so the border could be further out in some areas. This page: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/comlaw/legislation/LegislativeInstrument1.nsf/0/3075C0CCC553EF84CA25711400120045?OpenDocument links to a definition of the baseline (including lon/lat points) if anyone's really interested. -- =b ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Maritime boundaries
--- On Sun, 14/6/09, Darrin Smith wrote: > The reason I chose to put in the (roughly estimated) 12nm > boundary was > that from the research I could find it's the *legal* > definition of the > extent of full australian territory, i.e. when you are > inside 12nm you > are in Australia and all laws apply - as is the case with > most > countries from what I could determine. The 200nm is to do > with resource > exploitation and full teritorial rights do not exist in > this area. The > other countries around where world where people have added > maratime > borders and been at the 12nm limit also from what I can > see. According to a 2008 pdf put out by the aussie govt, the 12nm is still valid, but they've had a huge "land" grab on resources in the other areas and it has been ratified by the UN... http://minister.ret.gov.au/TheHonMartinFergusonMP/Documents/colour-cs-map-with-names3.pdf ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Maritime boundaries
--- On Sun, 14/6/09, Darrin Smith wrote: > The reason I chose to put in the (roughly estimated) 12nm > boundary was > that from the research I could find it's the *legal* > definition of the > extent of full australian territory, i.e. when you are > inside 12nm you > are in Australia and all laws apply - as is the case with > most > countries from what I could determine. The 200nm is to do > with resource > exploitation and full teritorial rights do not exist in > this area. The > other countries around where world where people have added > maratime > borders and been at the 12nm limit also from what I can > see. I should have read up on it first I guess, but that's only partially true. Since UN based conferences in the 1960s various nations have signed up to various international treaties, that originally went from 3nm, to 6nm, to 12nm and now various countries have put in requests for recognition to 200nm, Australia being one of them. Exceptions in Australia's case exist where it meets territorial waters with PNG and they have agreements in places as to who owns what, and around several islands which only extend 3nm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters What I can't figure out is if these treaties have been ratified and Australia's submission for 200nm was/is accepted/valid, or what's going on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters#Submissions_with_recommendations ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Maritime boundaries
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009 04:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Delta Foxtrot wrote: > > I noticed a bunch of maritime boundaries at 12nm, however most > countries have made a "land" grab and extended their maritime borders > to 200nm. > > I suppose this is more of a general question since it would effect > almost all non-landlocked countries. > > Are the 12nm boundaries even relevant/valid any more? The reason I chose to put in the (roughly estimated) 12nm boundary was that from the research I could find it's the *legal* definition of the extent of full australian territory, i.e. when you are inside 12nm you are in Australia and all laws apply - as is the case with most countries from what I could determine. The 200nm is to do with resource exploitation and full teritorial rights do not exist in this area. The other countries around where world where people have added maratime borders and been at the 12nm limit also from what I can see. -- =b ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
--- On Sun, 14/6/09, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.8528&lon=140.9719&zoom=13&layers=B000FTF > > has the swamp in the middle of the map (judging from the > aerial imagery) Roughly judging from the aerial image the border would be closer to 140.9698 degrees east than 140.9640, but I don't know of any fixed points in the bounds of the image to align it so that would be guessing just as much, but there is about 500m between the two sets of points. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Maritime boundaries
I noticed a bunch of maritime boundaries at 12nm, however most countries have made a "land" grab and extended their maritime borders to 200nm. I suppose this is more of a general question since it would effect almost all non-landlocked countries. Are the 12nm boundaries even relevant/valid any more? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Delta Foxtrot wrote: > I've merged the 2 administrative boundaries into 1 and aligned them both to > be 140.9640 degrees east, which is the best I can do based on the > information you provided and I found on the net. > > I assume the border is supposed to be a straight line, but real life and > what's on paper rarely are one and the same :) sounds good i must take some tourist detours further south with the gps next trip to adelaide -- The lunatic, the lover, and the poet, Are of imagination all compact... -- Wm. Shakespeare, "A Midsummer Night's Dream" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
--- On Sun, 14/6/09, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > Nick and I both cross this line a few times a year > > the OSM boundary is not correctly aligned with the signs on > the Mallee Highway either > > needs some variation on which routes we take it seems I've merged the 2 administrative boundaries into 1 and aligned them both to be 140.9640 degrees east, which is the best I can do based on the information you provided and I found on the net. I assume the border is supposed to be a straight line, but real life and what's on paper rarely are one and the same :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Delta Foxtrot wrote: > Anyone up for a road trip to the middle of no where Vic/SA to get some GPS > data on the survey line? :) Nick and I both cross this line a few times a year the OSM boundary is not correctly aligned with the signs on the Mallee Highway either needs some variation on which routes we take it seems -- BOFH excuse #5: static from plastic slide rules ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.8528&lon=140.9719&zoom=13&layers=B000FTF > > has the swamp in the middle of the map (judging from the > aerial imagery) > > the road going north from the swamp has the boundary on the > eastern edge Yea, but the aerial images aren't aligned to fixed points and this problem seems to be worst in the middle of no where. Anyone up for a road trip to the middle of no where Vic/SA to get some GPS data on the survey line? :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Delta Foxtrot wrote: > --- On Sun, 14/6/09, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > > photo from Mullinger swamp near naracorte > > Can you tell me where the swamp is on the map? It doesn't look like anyone > has plotted it yet. > > > but i didn't own a GPS then > > Pity it would have answered my question, or at least been within 10m :) > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-34.004&lon=140.999&zoom=11 > > I've fixed that up so it's not double trouble and tried to make it as > accurate as possible by combining both boundaries into one. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.8528&lon=140.9719&zoom=13&layers=B000FTF has the swamp in the middle of the map (judging from the aerial imagery) the road going north from the swamp has the boundary on the eastern edge -- When I reflect upon the number of disagreeable people who I know who have gone to a better world, I am moved to lead a different life. -- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
--- On Sun, 14/6/09, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > 2 miles and 19 chains is the measure in the High Court > documents; then about 2 1/4 miles Considering the inch (and other imperial measurements) weren't standardised until the 1950s (1 inch = 2.54mm) that's a little imprecise to work out unless they specified the longitude in the court documents too. As a guesstimate conversion that works out to be about 3.6km which is 140.9640 degrees, but I'm guessing that isn't 100% correct. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Delta Foxtrot wrote: > Yep, read up on all that, but I'm trying to figure out the exact longitude > it was set at by the privy council ruling. > > All the state borders that are set to exact lat/longs are all screwy and > I'm trying to fix it to be as accuracte as humanly possible. > > Well the borders are probably all screwy for numerous reasons, but the ones > with fixed lat/long are the most obviously wrong. 2 miles and 19 chains is the measure in the High Court documents; then about 2 1/4 miles -- Whenever the literary German dives into a sentence, that is the last you are going to see of him until he emerges on the other side of his Atlantic with his verb in his mouth. -- Mark Twain "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
--- On Sun, 14/6/09, Liz wrote: > Longitude?? Yes, longitude, must have latitude on the brain... > it's actually a really interesting story > > with a survey error and Privy Council hearing to settle the > boundary Yep, read up on all that, but I'm trying to figure out the exact longitude it was set at by the privy council ruling. All the state borders that are set to exact lat/longs are all screwy and I'm trying to fix it to be as accuracte as humanly possible. Well the borders are probably all screwy for numerous reasons, but the ones with fixed lat/long are the most obviously wrong. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] SA/Vic border
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Delta Foxtrot wrote: > Does anyone know the exact latitude of the SA/Vic border? > > I've only seen rough estimates of 3.6km west of 141 degrees east. > > > > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au Longitude?? :-^ it's actually a really interesting story with a survey error and Privy Council hearing to settle the boundary ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] SA/Vic border
Does anyone know the exact latitude of the SA/Vic border? I've only seen rough estimates of 3.6km west of 141 degrees east. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
