Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?
I'm mighty obliged to you for that excellent synopsis; thank you. Yes, at a certain point such "proposals" have to "be discussed amongst yourselves," of course, I've seen this and you are in a "certain stage" of such things. Then there is your primer on "Aussie 2, 4, 6," excellent. Yeh, the odd numbers can be odd ducks. Odd you haven't any 8s. OK, I'll keep my mouth shut after that. Watching from a distance (quite a distance, from California) and waving g'day, mate. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?
Hi Steve, You are looking in the right spot, although the confusion is understandable-the proposal (for lack of a better word) is for ACT Districts to be moved from Level 7 to Level 5, and for the other "districts" to not be included at all. Forgive me if I over-explain some of these points, but for your benefit as a non-Australian: Australia's government is generally broken into three levels of government: Federal, State/Territory (6 states, 9 territories), and Local (539 LGAs and Unincorporated Areas). These are currently: admin_level=2, admin_level=4, and admin_level=6. LGAs are the second-level subdivision, and provide basic services: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_government_in_Australia Counties are very much an anachronism, and exist only on paper as part of the cadastral land title system for some states. The ACT does not contain any local government areas. It does, however have "districts": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburbs_of_Canberra#Districts. ACT Districts are subdivisions that are used for land titles, but also form part of the ACT government's provision of local services and planning strategies. Dian See, what I'm getting at is saying ACT District is 5, yet 7 means District, well, that ambiguity trips me up.___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?
See, what I'm getting at is saying ACT District is 5, yet 7 means District, well, that ambiguity trips me up. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?
On Apr 10, 2022, at 5:53 PM, Dian Ågesson wrote: > Thanks Andrew, > > I'll make the adjustments to level 7 and 9 in the update guidelines as I > prepare them. > > I can also add the Districts of the ACT in at Level 5 as well, although > should it be documented for all states' counties? > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lands_administrative_divisions_of_New_South_Wales > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadastral_divisions_of_Victoria Thank you Dian. I'm not sure which "update guidelines" you are preparing, I'd love to see a link to our wiki about these data, if that's what you mean (and when they are ready, beyond your preparation and shared with the world, of course!) You mention both administrative divisions and cadastral divisions. The former enter OSM while the latter do not. Well, that's my understanding. It may be that ini Australia these do blur and it is simply "understood" that there are "matches" between admin and cadastral "levels" of boundaries, so admin_level 5, 7 and 9 are appropriate for "certain things." If I'm being noob-ish and blurring what "everybody already knows," please excuse me, I'm not from around there. Maybe one way to say it is "called cadastral because of history, now de facto and de jure administrative." I really don't know. I do want to make sure I'm looking at the right row in the table [1] about what these numbers mean (or maybe look elsewhere...in our wiki? something AU-specific?): For 5, I don't (our wiki doesn't) see anything specific noted For 7, I see "District or Region Border (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.)" and For 9, I see "Locality Border (Suburbs or Towns) (ONLY where larger than ABS boundary)" Am I ship-shape here? Where might I discover ACT Districts are admin_level=5? Is there a wiki? Thanks. [1] https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?
Thanks Andrew, I'll make the adjustments to level 7 and 9 in the update guidelines as I prepare them. I can also add the Districts of the ACT in at Level 5 as well, although should it be documented for all states' counties? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lands_administrative_divisions_of_New_South_Wales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadastral_divisions_of_Victoria Dian On 2022-04-09 10:44, Andrew Davidson wrote: On 8/4/22 21:57, Dian Ågesson wrote: Hey Andrew, I don't believe anything was decided with regards to ACT districts. However, after looking into the details I don't think they actually fit in the administration boundary set up at all; seems closer to parishes/counties on other states than a "council" or locality. I was going to suggest that they get moved to admin_level 5 which could be also used for counties in other states (that still have them). Otherwise no problem with getting rid of level 7 and moving suburbs to 9. ___ 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
