Re: [talk-au] Admin levels for LGAs / suburbs etc changed (Was "Suburbs & admin boundaries stopping streets being found?)

[cleary]

I agree with reverting the changes in the wiki in regard to Administrative 
Boundaries.

Mike King's comments supporting boundaries for (1) country, (2) state, (3) LGA 
and (4) suburb are consistent with general usage in the wider community and 
with previous usage in OSM.

There are other "administrative" boundaries established by governments but they 
are for specialised purposes such as counties and parishes used for property 
titles, land districts for regulating agriculture, health districts defining 
which body administers health services in designated areas, "regions, commands 
and districts" for administering police services, "school education areas" for 
administering schools and, no doubt, "administrative boundaries" for many other 
government services at both state and federal levels.  However these are really 
special purpose boundaries which don't belong on the main map, or could be 
mapped as something other than administrative if there were a reason to include 
them in OSM.

In regard to levels, I had a quick look at other countries but government 
systems seem too different for me to make broad comparisons. I am a little 
familiar with Ireland where counties roughly correlate in size and in some 
functionality with LGAs in Australia. In Ireland, counties are tagged as level 
6.  In the U.K, counties seem to be generally mapped as level 6 except in 
Metropolitan areas in England.   I had previously perceived level 6 as 
appropriate for LGAs in Australia and cannot see any reason or need to change 
it.  Further, I am reluctant to move LGAs to a lower level as they are 
significant in the Australian systems of government.  Some individual LGAs in 
NSW have larger populations than the whole of the Northern Territory. Brisbane 
City LGA has a population much greater than the whole of Tasmania and not much 
less than that of South Australia. In terms of area, I believe there is one LGA 
in Western Australia that has a larger area than the whole of Victoria. I would 
prefer to have LGAs in Australia at not lower than level 6.

I think most suburbs have been mapped as level 10 and that seems OK to me but I 
have no problem with changing to level 9 if that were agreed. Unless we are 
intending to map something else at level 10, it doesn't really matter.   As I 
wrote above - I support mapping country, states (& territories), LGAs and 
suburbs as administrative boundaries so I do not see anything at a lower level 
being included in Australian administrative boundaries. 

So I suggest we stick with 

State and Territory  at level 4
LGA at level 6
suburb at level 10

 





On Wed, 2 Sep 2020, at 4:06 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
> On 2/09/2020 10:38 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > 
> > Did a bit of searching & it appears it was only changed on 15/7/20, but 
> > no, I certainly don't remember any discussion?
> > 
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Admin_level_10=prev=2012028
> > 
> > Makes reference to "Australian Tagging Review (2012 / 2016)", but that 
> > doesn't help me much either?
> 
> Sigh.
> 
> He is a serial offender:
> 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-October/013009.html
> 
> There was no discussion. I'd suggest that the changes to the wiki page 
> should be reverted.
> 
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Admin levels for LGAs / suburbs etc changed (Was "Suburbs & admin boundaries stopping streets being found?)

[Andrew Davidson]

On 2/09/2020 10:38 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:


Did a bit of searching & it appears it was only changed on 15/7/20, but 
no, I certainly don't remember any discussion?


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Admin_level_10=prev=2012028

Makes reference to "Australian Tagging Review (2012 / 2016)", but that 
doesn't help me much either?


Sigh.

He is a serial offender:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-October/013009.html

There was no discussion. I'd suggest that the changes to the wiki page 
should be reverted.


___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Admin levels for LGAs / suburbs etc changed (Was "Suburbs & admin boundaries stopping streets being found?)

[Mike King]

Hi Graeme

I’m not sure I can offer any advice on tagging but I’ve worked in land 
administration and can offer some general guidance on the hierarchy of land 
classification.  My knowledge is mostly Queensland based but I believe all of 
the states have a similar system given that ultimate authority over land is 
federal.  The nested hierarchy is simply Country>State>LGA>suburb (or 
locality)>parcel.  That is parcels comprise suburbs, suburbs comprise LGAs and 
LGAs comprise states so there is a complete coverage or fabric over the land 
and inshore areas.  The regions mentioned will most likely not have any admin 
status unless they are associated with an act of legislation (such as South 
East Queensland which now has defined boundary of the common participating 
councils).  There may be other areas such as Parishes or Counties which are 
still used in legal titles but these are largely no longer used for anything 
other than that due to the fact they were drawn up in an age which predates 
most modern systems and in a time where the local Church as something people 
recognised as a centre of an area.

Maybe someone working with cadastral fabrics in the states can provide more 
detail if required.

Kind Regards

Mike King
GIS Specialist
NHVR Solutions, Corporate Services
National Heavy Vehicle Regulator
P: 07 3309 8880 | E: mike.k...@nhvr.gov.au
PO Box 492 | Fortitude Valley QLD 4006
Gasworks | Level 3, 76 Skyring Terrace| Newstead QLD 4006
www.nhvr.gov.au
[cid:image001.gif@01D3894F.ABA64A60] 
[cid:image002.png@01D3894F.ABA64A60]    
[cid:image003.gif@01D3894F.ABA64A60] 


From: Graeme Fitzpatrick [mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 2 September 2020 10:38 AM
To: OSM-Au
Subject: [talk-au] Admin levels for LGAs / suburbs etc changed (Was "Suburbs & 
admin boundaries stopping streets being found?)

On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 18:39, Andrew Harvey 
mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 11:21, cleary mailto:o...@97k.com>> wrote:

I looked at the Wiki. It is quite a while since I looked at the section on 
administrative boundaries. My recollection is that it used to have LGA as 
admin_level=6 and suburb as level 9 or 10.  I do not recall any discussion of 
inclusion of regions, districts and townsites nor any previous discussion in 
regard to changing the level of LGA.   The wiki includes a link to a 
downloadable example which is headed "Australian Boundary Tagging _ OSM" but 
with copyright attributed to Government of Western Australia.  I am not sure 
how the current content of wiki was arrived at.  My memory is not perfect so 
perhaps someone can remind me how the wiki content on administrative boundaries 
and the WA Government copyright document was reached.

In NSW there are land districts defined in legislation with administrative 
boards etc so they could be included if we could get permission to use the 
source data (not included in current approval as far as I am aware) and there 
are probably equivalents in other jurisdictions. I think administrative 
boundaries must be sourced from government.   In NSW,  land districts are 
larger in area than local government areas (LGAs) but their influence and 
importance is (in my view) much less than LGAs - the Greater Sydney Local Land 
Services board has the majority of its membership appointed by the Minister for 
Agriculture and few Sydney residents would even know of its existence or role.  
I'd want to put them at level 11, certainly not a higher level than the LGAs.  
I do not think that a larger area automatically warrants a higher 
administrative level.

I am open to changing and developing our guidelines. However some boundaries 
are not necessarily administrative  e.g. Eyre Peninsula (natural region),  
Barossa Valley District (protected area), Illawarra Region, New England Region. 
 Some boundaries might be tourist labels or have local currency but would need 
to be mapped as something other than administrative.

Sorry I'm getting offtopic here...

I'm only familiar with NSW but for example we have a few non-administrative 
regions/districts mapped

Illawarra https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7876497 tagged as place=region 
without an admin_level
Northern Beaches https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7876483 tagged as 
place=district without an admin_level
Lower North Shore https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7876484 tagged as 
place=district without an admin_level
Upper North Shore https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11373192 tagged as 
place=district without an admin_level
St George https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7876480 tagged as 
place=district without an admin_level
others could be added like The Shire, South Coast, Hunter Valley, Central 
Coast, Hills District, Eastern Suburbs, Blue Mountains + regional 

[talk-au] Admin levels for LGAs / suburbs etc changed (Was "Suburbs & admin boundaries stopping streets being found?)

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

 On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 18:39, Andrew Harvey 
wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 11:21, cleary  wrote:
>
>>
>> I looked at the Wiki. It is quite a while since I looked at the section
>> on administrative boundaries. My recollection is that it used to have LGA
>> as admin_level=6 and suburb as level 9 or 10.  I do not recall any
>> discussion of inclusion of regions, districts and townsites nor any
>> previous discussion in regard to changing the level of LGA.   The wiki
>> includes a link to a downloadable example which is headed "Australian
>> Boundary Tagging _ OSM" but with copyright attributed to Government of
>> Western Australia.  I am not sure how the current content of wiki was
>> arrived at.  My memory is not perfect so perhaps someone can remind me how
>> the wiki content on administrative boundaries and the WA Government
>> copyright document was reached.
>>
>> In NSW there are land districts defined in legislation with
>> administrative boards etc so they could be included if we could get
>> permission to use the source data (not included in current approval as far
>> as I am aware) and there are probably equivalents in other jurisdictions. I
>> think administrative boundaries must be sourced from government.   In NSW,
>> land districts are larger in area than local government areas (LGAs) but
>> their influence and importance is (in my view) much less than LGAs - the
>> Greater Sydney Local Land Services board has the majority of its membership
>> appointed by the Minister for Agriculture and few Sydney residents would
>> even know of its existence or role.  I'd want to put them at level 11,
>> certainly not a higher level than the LGAs.  I do not think that a larger
>> area automatically warrants a higher administrative level.
>>
>> I am open to changing and developing our guidelines. However some
>> boundaries are not necessarily administrative  e.g. Eyre Peninsula (natural
>> region),  Barossa Valley District (protected area), Illawarra Region, New
>> England Region.  Some boundaries might be tourist labels or have local
>> currency but would need to be mapped as something other than administrative.
>>
>
> Sorry I'm getting offtopic here...
>
> I'm only familiar with NSW but for example we have a few
> non-administrative regions/districts mapped
>
> Illawarra https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7876497 tagged as
> place=region without an admin_level
> Northern Beaches https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7876483 tagged as
> place=district without an admin_level
> Lower North Shore https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7876484 tagged
> as place=district without an admin_level
> Upper North Shore https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11373192 tagged
> as place=district without an admin_level
> St George https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7876480 tagged as
> place=district without an admin_level
> others could be added like The Shire, South Coast, Hunter Valley, Central
> Coast, Hills District, Eastern Suburbs, Blue Mountains + regional
> regions/districts.
>
> I agree that these are not administrative boundaries so I'm fine with not
> giving them an admin_level, and it's a fair argument that these are not
> verifiable on the ground, but nonetheless they do exist and people refer to
> them frequently in conversation.
>
> In terms of the admin_level for LGA's I think if we have administrative
> regions or not shouldn't really affect the admin_level value too much, I
> think going with what most other countries use for
>

Reposting this as my reply only went to Cleary, not the list, & it seems
important enough to follow up. Sorry if it's a bit messy & confused!

On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 11:21, cleary  wrote:

>
> I looked at the Wiki. It is quite a while since I looked at the section on
> administrative boundaries. My recollection is that it used to have LGA as
> admin_level=6 and suburb as level 9 or 10.


I had the same vague memory?

 I do not recall any discussion of inclusion of regions, districts and
> townsites nor any previous discussion in regard to changing the level of
> LGA.


Did a bit of searching & it appears it was only changed on 15/7/20, but no,
I certainly don't remember any discussion?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Admin_level_10=prev=2012028

Makes reference to "Australian Tagging Review (2012 / 2016)", but that
doesn't help me much either?


Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Contributions to Road Geometry in Perth, Australia

[Andrew Harvey]

Heads up, looks like their team has started to map in Perth, see on OSMCha
-> https://osmcha.org/?aoi=80b50a6d-6bb5-48cb-8ac4-4b2ddd9d5d76

Mostly looks okay to me, and mostly minor tweaks, though I raised a few
questions and issues on changeset comments but also listed most of them
here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/840589945/history was added but the
existing road name and other applicable attributes were not applied. This
same issue happens in quite a few other places too so appears to be
systemic. I've raised some changeset comments but worth including this as
part of the standard practice by your editing team.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/842851495/history is that a roundabout? I
can't tell from the Maxar imagery, yet that is the claimed source, how
could you tell from the imagery what this is?

I personally find splitting ways for a traffic island at roundabouts like
in https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/840189281/history a tad to excessive
(would prefer to just tag the node as traffic island and use one way, gives
a much cleaner dataset as the transition between dual and single
carriageways is always messy) but I guess it's not wrong and both styles
are popular in OSM currently. Does the community have a view on this?

Unclear source of the turn restriction in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/90223764#map=18/-32.04553/115.80953

On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 21:28, OSM NextBillion. AI 
wrote:

> Thank you cleary for valuable insights, we would be more cautious while
> mapping in such areas. While Satellite Imagery is our prime resource, we’d
> consider mapillary photos as well wherever available. We do have some
> expert assistance in our team for interpreting satellite imagery and map
> something only if we’re double sure of it’s existence. We will refer to
> mappers history before editing existing data to understand if it was
> created using local expertise and would change only if there is conclusive
> evidence from satellite and mapillary imageries.
>
> We will reach out to local mapping experts through forum and/or changeset
> comments if we require further help.
>
> Thank you all once again for the suggestions, we look forward to working
> with you all. :)
>
>
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 05:35, cleary  wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks for the interest in mapping in Australia and thanks for posting
>> your plans on this list.
>>
>> I would add to the caution expressed by others.  I live in an urban
>> location in Australia but I have travelled in other areas within
>> Australia.  It has taken me quite some time to learn to interpret satellite
>> imagery and I still have a lot to learn about this country.  After
>> personally visiting areas and noting what I see, and sometimes taking
>> photographs, I then return home and compare my notes with what I see in the
>> imagery and I am still surprised.  I think it can be quite precarious to
>> map features using just satellite imagery unless you have expert assistance
>> in interpreting the imagery.  For example, a common error by others has
>> been to map lines of cleared vegetation as roads when they are actually
>> fences. Even where an unmapped road exists, it is probably still unmapped
>> because it is a private road and not accessible by the public - many of the
>> roads on rural properties in Australia are private and, if added to the
>> map, need to marked as such. Farmers get annoyed about intruders on their
>> farms especially as biosecurity is a significant concern in parts of
>> Australia.
>>
>> So while I appreciate contributions to the map, I suggest that "armchair"
>> mapping needs to be undertaken with a lot of caution.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2020, at 2:17 AM, OSM NextBillion. AI wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > We’re a small team based out of Hyderabad, India. We would be doing
>> > minimal edits in Perth and contribute to OSM in the next couple of
>> > weeks, in-line with OSM and Australia specific tagging guidelines [Link
>> > ].
>> >
>> >
>> > Please refer our Wiki
>> >  and Github
>> >  project pages for
>> > more information.
>> >
>> > Looking forward to suggestions, if any ☺
>> >
>> > Thanking you in advance,
>> > Team NextBillion
>> > ___
>> > Talk-au mailing list
>> > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>> >
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org

Re: [talk-au] OSM down?

[Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au]

Sounds like reocurence of https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/426

So yes, something got broken on OSM servers.

Not sure whatever creating issues on openstreetmap/operations is helpful.

Sep 1, 2020, 08:02 by graemefi...@gmail.com:

> Has something crashed?
>
> Was getting a weird error message when trying to save changes earlier, & when 
> I now try to open OSM, I get:
> We're sorry, but something went wrong.
>
> The issue has been logged for investigation. Please try again later.
>
> Technical details for the administrator of this website 
> 
> This website is powered by > Phusion Passenger 
> > ®, the smart 
> application server built by > Phusion> ®. 
>
> OSM problem or mine?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] OSM down?

[Benjamin Ceravolo]

Hi Graeme,

I had the same message around 1500 hrs (AEST) when i tried 15 or so
mites later it was fine.

Ben.

On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 at 16:04, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> Has something crashed?
>
> Was getting a weird error message when trying to save changes earlier, &
> when I now try to open OSM, I get:
> We're sorry, but something went wrong.
>
> The issue has been logged for investigation. Please try again later.
> Technical details for the administrator of this website
> 
> This website is powered by *Phusion Passenger*
> ®, the
> smart application server built by *Phusion*®.
>
> OSM problem or mine?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] OSM down?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Has something crashed?

Was getting a weird error message when trying to save changes earlier, &
when I now try to open OSM, I get:
We're sorry, but something went wrong.

The issue has been logged for investigation. Please try again later.
Technical details for the administrator of this website

This website is powered by *Phusion Passenger*
®, the smart
application server built by *Phusion*®.

OSM problem or mine?

Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au