Re: [talk-au] Nominatim gives wrong suburb?
Either the ABS boundaries might be wrong, or the boundary has moved since 2006, or where you think the boundary is, isn't where the ABS thinks it is, it's borderlineish though... http://maps.bigtincan.com/?z=16ll=-27.517,153.028layer=B00TT ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nominatim gives wrong suburb?
On 13 May 2010 18:08, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Either the ABS boundaries might be wrong, or the boundary has moved since 2006, or where you think the boundary is, isn't where the ABS thinks it is, it's borderlineish though... http://maps.bigtincan.com/?z=16ll=-27.517,153.028layer=B00TT Wrong link... http://maps.bigtincan.com/?z=16ll=-27.517,153.028layer=000B000TT ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nominatim gives wrong suburb?
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 6:09 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Either the ABS boundaries might be wrong, or the boundary has moved since 2006, or where you think the boundary is, isn't where the ABS thinks it is, it's borderlineish though... http://maps.bigtincan.com/?z=16ll=-27.517,153.028layer=000B000TT Actually, I think I know what might be going on. The property is clearly within the suburb of Annerley, however, the property's associatedStreet *is itself a suburb boundary*. Maybe Nominatim is unable to deduce the suburb of such properties - maybe it flips a coin, and in this case it got it wrong. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nominatim gives wrong suburb?
On 13 May 2010 23:40, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, I think I know what might be going on. The property is clearly within the suburb of Annerley, however, the property's associatedStreet *is itself a suburb boundary*. If that's the case, is the street numbered? Maybe Nominatim is unable to deduce the suburb of such properties - maybe it flips a coin, and in this case it got it wrong. If it's not numbered and the suburb boundaries aren't ordered then it's a likely outcome. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nominatim gives wrong suburb?
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 1:17 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 May 2010 23:40, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, I think I know what might be going on. The property is clearly within the suburb of Annerley, however, the property's associatedStreet *is itself a suburb boundary*. If that's the case, is the street numbered? Not sure what you mean by that. This is the example properly: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/45822724 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nominatim gives wrong suburb?
On 14 May 2010 08:51, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 1:17 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 May 2010 23:40, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, I think I know what might be going on. The property is clearly within the suburb of Annerley, however, the property's associatedStreet *is itself a suburb boundary*. If that's the case, is the street numbered? Not sure what you mean by that. This is the example properly: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/45822724 If the houses have street numbers odds might be one suburb, evens the other... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Ways incorrectly tagged as admin boundaries?
Hi, I've come across a handful of Ways with ABS data attributions that are (probably incorrectly) marked as administrative boundaries. They are: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/14191309 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/13807736 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/14192887 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/16420310 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28262742 All of them are in southern WA and were edited by the same user. Given the au.gov.abs tags, could this be the result of a misfiring script? A couple of them (notably 14191309) also have other tags that look wrong. Cheers, Balram ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
