Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 13/1/17 11:51, Andrew Harvey wrote:


I agree with this. The difference between unincorporated or not could be
added by a new tag to indicate


Or we could not break the model and use a different admin_level.


, could be determined from the name,


Thus requiring the data consumer to parse the name to determine if 
something is or isn't a local government area.


> or from

the operator tag which links to the legal entity.


I had a look at this. Of the 409,000 admin boundary relations in OSM 
there are 52 with an operator tag. After discounting the ones where 
people should have used the short_name tag and the ones where someone 
had put school districts in at admin_level 11, you are left with about 
10. As far as I could tell by trying to search for these entities they 
are all examples of someone putting in things at the wrong admin_level 
or things that they wanted to appear on the map and then trying to fix 
that by putting an operator tag on.



The wiki just says LGA border (eg. Shire/Council) for level 6. If you're
worried we could just add eg. Shire/Council/Unincorporated).


It actually says:

"Local Government Authority Border (e.g Shire/Council)"

Unincorporated is not a "Local Government Authority"

Plus I think Local Government Areas are useful things to have in OSM, 
what admin_level do you suggest we set aside for them?




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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Harvey]

> For practical purposes they perform the same duties, therefore the same
admin_level should be used.

I agree with this. The difference between unincorporated or not could be
added by a new tag to indicate, could be determined from the name, or from
the operator tag which links to the legal entity.

> Why? the current definition for level 4 is: "State or Territory Border"

The wiki just says LGA border (eg. Shire/Council) for level 6. If you're
worried we could just add eg. Shire/Council/Unincorporated).

On 13 January 2017 at 11:32, Andrew Davidson  wrote:

> On 13/1/17 11:21, Warin wrote:
>
>>
>> That would also suggest that states and territories should be in
>> separate levels.
>>
>>
> Why? the current definition for level 4 is:
>
> "State or Territory Border"
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 13/1/17 11:21, Warin wrote:


That would also suggest that states and territories should be in
separate levels.



Why? the current definition for level 4 is:

"State or Territory Border"



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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 10-Jan-17 07:19 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
So you want to put these areas into OSM, fair enough. But why do we 
have to break the definition of admin_level 6 when there are three 
admin_levels that are currently undefined, unusable, or redundant?


That would also suggest that states and territories should be in 
separate levels.


For practical purposes they perform the same duties, therefore the same 
admin_level should be used.


Another option is admin_level 7 which is currently so vaguely defined 
that we could come with a working definition that includes 
unincorporated areas with names.


On 05/01/17 17:06, Andrew Harvey wrote:

I agree that since the area is commonly known and and referred to as
"Unincorporated Area of Far West NSW"so should be mapped in OSM and with
that name. The other name tags

In my opinion this area should be tagged as admin_level=6 since it acts
and feels like other Shires, Councils, etc. Even if those Local
Government services are administered by some other entity I don't think
that matters. The operator tag can be set as Department of Industry or
NSW Government, etc.



___
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] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

So you want to put these areas into OSM, fair enough. But why do we have 
to break the definition of admin_level 6 when there are three 
admin_levels that are currently undefined, unusable, or redundant?


Another option is admin_level 7 which is currently so vaguely defined 
that we could come with a working definition that includes 
unincorporated areas with names.


On 05/01/17 17:06, Andrew Harvey wrote:

I agree that since the area is commonly known and and referred to as
"Unincorporated Area of Far West NSW"so should be mapped in OSM and with
that name. The other name tags

In my opinion this area should be tagged as admin_level=6 since it acts
and feels like other Shires, Councils, etc. Even if those Local
Government services are administered by some other entity I don't think
that matters. The operator tag can be set as Department of Industry or
NSW Government, etc.



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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Harvey]

I agree that since the area is commonly known and and referred to as
"Unincorporated Area of Far West NSW" so should be mapped in OSM and with
that name. The other name tags

In my opinion this area should be tagged as admin_level=6 since it acts and
feels like other Shires, Councils, etc. Even if those Local Government
services are administered by some other entity I don't think that matters.
The operator tag can be set as Department of Industry or NSW Government,
etc.

On 5 January 2017 at 12:11, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 03-Jan-17 04:15 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
>
>> On 3/1/17 13:24, Warin wrote:
>>
>> Near as I can figure .. your joking.
>>>
>>
>> No I'm being serious. Your proposal is to use level 6 to map the entity
>> "that performs the function of a 'local government authority'". In the case
>> of the western part of NSW this is the New South Wales Government.
>>
>> That said , and example would be the name used for nsw western bit
>>> name = Unincorporated Area of Western NSW could be appropriate
>>>
>>
>> No, that would be a description. There is no entity called
>> "Unincorporated Area of Western NSW".
>>
>
> It is a name.
> Another sample ..
> https://digitalfarwestnsw.com.au/government-services/the-uni
> ncorporated-area-of-far-west-nsw-2/ "Unincorporated Area of Far West NSW"
>
>
>
>> ... run
>>> by the Western Lands Commission - part of the NSW Dept of
>>> Environment ?
>>>
>>
>> That's still a description and also not correct.
>>
>
> Ok on the Dept/Commission thing.. must be a historic thing .. found on the
> web.
>
> This http://www.crownland.nsw.gov.au/crown_lands/western_region
> says "In these areas, which include the villages of Silverton, Tibooburra,
> and Milparinka, the Department of Industry - Lands (the Department) assists
> in co-ordinating various community services."
> I do wonder if that is current ... copyright says 2010.
>
> So rather than the whole NSW Government .. it could be the NSW Department
> of Industry - Lands.
>
> 
> Some names are descriptive, and we are the better for it. Tibooburra for
> instance.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 03-Jan-17 04:15 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:

On 3/1/17 13:24, Warin wrote:


Near as I can figure .. your joking.


No I'm being serious. Your proposal is to use level 6 to map the 
entity "that performs the function of a 'local government authority'". 
In the case of the western part of NSW this is the New South Wales 
Government.



That said , and example would be the name used for nsw western bit
name = Unincorporated Area of Western NSW could be appropriate


No, that would be a description. There is no entity called 
"Unincorporated Area of Western NSW".


It is a name.
Another sample ..
https://digitalfarwestnsw.com.au/government-services/the-unincorporated-area-of-far-west-nsw-2/ 
"Unincorporated Area of Far West NSW"






... run
by the Western Lands Commission - part of the NSW Dept of 
Environment ?


That's still a description and also not correct.


Ok on the Dept/Commission thing.. must be a historic thing .. found on 
the web.


This http://www.crownland.nsw.gov.au/crown_lands/western_region
says "In these areas, which include the villages of Silverton, 
Tibooburra, and Milparinka, the Department of Industry - Lands (the 
Department) assists in co-ordinating various community services."

I do wonder if that is current ... copyright says 2010.

So rather than the whole NSW Government .. it could be the NSW 
Department of Industry - Lands.



Some names are descriptive, and we are the better for it. Tibooburra for 
instance.









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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 3/1/17 13:24, Warin wrote:


Near as I can figure .. your joking.


No I'm being serious. Your proposal is to use level 6 to map the entity 
"that performs the function of a 'local government authority'". In the 
case of the western part of NSW this is the New South Wales Government.



That said , and example would be the name used for nsw western bit
name = Unincorporated Area of Western NSW could be appropriate


No, that would be a description. There is no entity called 
"Unincorporated Area of Western NSW".



... run
by the Western Lands Commission - part of the NSW Dept of Environment ?


That's still a description and also not correct.

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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 02-Jan-17 08:12 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote:



On 30/12/16 10:44, Warin wrote:


It does have an administration that performs the function of a 'local
government authority'.



There is an administration that performs the function of a 'local
administration' .

The authority exercised is, in OSM terms, a level 6 authority.

The 'best fit' is level 6 - that is the authority that is exercised.


So under this definition there will be two quite large level 6 
boundaries called "New South Wales Government" and "South Australian 
Government". Not sure that will make anyone happy.


Near as I can figure .. your joking.


The state of NSW carries the name=New South Wales ... no Government here 
...  in fact I'd think very few things could carry the name * Government ?


That said , and example would be the name used for nsw western bit
name = Unincorporated Area of Western NSW could be appropriate ... run 
by the Western Lands Commission - part of the NSW Dept of Environment ?


Similar things will probably exist for other areas.

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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 30/12/16 10:44, Warin wrote:


It does have an administration that performs the function of a 'local
government authority'.



There is an administration that performs the function of a 'local
administration' .

The authority exercised is, in OSM terms, a level 6 authority.

The 'best fit' is level 6 - that is the authority that is exercised.


So under this definition there will be two quite large level 6 
boundaries called "New South Wales Government" and "South Australian 
Government". Not sure that will make anyone happy.




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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 29-Dec-16 04:51 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:



On 29/12/16 09:08, cleary wrote:


I have a different view about whether the unincorporated areas actually
exist. They have defined boundaries and names, both assigned by the
respective State governments, and included in the LGA datasets. I have
seen the boundaries signposted when travelling in rural areas of both
NSW and SA and the signs are the same as signs identifying shire/city
boundaries.


That's not the issue. I'm not saying that there isn't parts of NSW 
known as unincorporated area. All I'm saying is that this is the part 
of NSW that doesn't have a local government authority and as such 
should not be tagged as admin_level 6. 


It does have an administration that performs the function of a 'local 
government authority'.


There is no local administration in this area it's all done from the 
state government level.


There is an administration that performs the function of a 'local 
administration' .


The authority exercised is, in OSM terms, a level 6 authority.

The 'best fit' is level 6 - that is the authority that is exercised.

-
The authority physical location should not be an item for exclusion 
concern.
For me the primary thing is .. who administers this area at level 6? 
Leaving it blank means either OSM does not have the data or there is no 
administration in this area at all. Neither of those things are true for 
NSW.


I think the objection to is the physical difference in location between 
the area administered and the the office of administration?
Is the office of administration something that is presently mapped? If 
it were .. would that ease your objection Andrew?


Level 6 is used for all sorts of things .. in different countries .. no 
reason why Australia should not have a reasonable and useful definition 
of what goes in level 6.






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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 29/12/16 09:08, cleary wrote:


I have a different view about whether the unincorporated areas actually
exist. They have defined boundaries and names, both assigned by the
respective State governments, and included in the LGA datasets. I have
seen the boundaries signposted when travelling in rural areas of both
NSW and SA and the signs are the same as signs identifying shire/city
boundaries.


That's not the issue. I'm not saying that there isn't parts of NSW known 
as unincorporated area. All I'm saying is that this is the part of NSW 
that doesn't have a local government authority and as such should not be 
tagged as admin_level 6. There is no local administration in this area 
it's all done from the state government level.


If you really want to put the unincorporated areas on the map I would 
have thought that the obvious answer was to give them a different 
admin_level to indicate that they are not of the same type. We currently 
have two redundant admin_levels that could be re-assigned to do this. 
Admin_level 9 was supposed to be used for non-ABS suburb boundaries but 
there are only about a dozen of these. Admin-level 8 is set aside for 
post code boundaries and there are 3 of these currently in OSM. Given 
that the post code boundaries are a commercial product I think we can 
safely assume that these will never become available, but in other 
countries this level is used for town boundaries and we may want to do 
this as well at some point in the future.


So I would suggest:

Admin_level 10 => Bounded locality (ABS or otherwise determined)
Admin_level 9 => Unincorporated areas
Admin_level 8 => Reserved for future use as post code or town boundaries
Admin_level 6 => Local Government Area.





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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 29-Dec-16 09:30 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

Hi all

I would agree with Warin's latest suggested definition: "The boundary 
of an authority that is responsible for local government 
 functions within that 
boundary."


If there's "something" there, we should be showing it!

Further to Cleary's comment about NSW Legislation, earlier this week I 
was looking at the BoM site for NSW & they had put out a weather 
warning for the Unincorporated Area of NSW, so they also think that it 
exists!


On a similar line (& apologies if it's been discussed & resolved 
previously) how do we treat Aboriginal towns? They lie within some 
form of "Shire" (presumably Level 6), but then each town is run by 
it's Local Community Council. Are they also a Level 6 authority?


I don't think they are a level 6 ...
Tibooburra and Silverton also have 'village councils' .. but are inside 
the 'unincorporated thingy' ...
I think these 'village councils' operate under the oversight of their 
respective level 6 bodies.
 These, if entered, should be a lesser number .. 7 (District or Region 
Border ) or 9 (Suburb and Locality Border) {8 is postcodes, 10 is Suburb 
and Locality Border (ABS boundaries) }  .. to show that they are a 
'lesser' entity.





Thanks

Graeme
_


On 29 December 2016 at 08:08, cleary > wrote:



I have a different view about whether the unincorporated areas
actually
exist. They have defined boundaries and names, both assigned by the
respective State governments, and included in the LGA datasets. I have
seen the boundaries signposted when travelling in rural areas of both
NSW and SA and the signs are the same as signs identifying shire/city
boundaries. Governments don't give boundaries, names and signposts to
entities that do not exist. I do agree that unincorporated areas have
different and varied governance/administrative arrangements - I
understand that State governments have considered the different
arrangements more suitable because the unincorporated areas are more
sparsely populated and/or have special circumstances. If it is
important
to highlight the different administrative arrangements, then Warin's
suggestion of additional tags is a good way forward. As the areas do
actually exist, it seems to me that they warrant being appropriately
mapped with administrative boundaries, as shown in the State
government
LGA datasets.

After Andrew's earlier comment about references in legislation, I
looked
at NSW legislation. There are a few references to the Unincorporated
Area of NSW and generally they refer to it as if it were a local
government area. The most explicit is the Electricity Supply Act 1995
which states that the legislation "applies to the unincorporated
area as
if (a) references to a local government area were references to the
unincorporated area, and (b)  references to a local council were
references to the Western Lands Commissioner" and it makes similar
provisons in regard to Lord Howe Island and the Lord Howe Island
Board.
For practical purposes the Unincorporated Area of NSW and Lord Howe
Island appear to be treated as similar and equivalent to areas
administered by councils.

I don't think I can add anything new and would be repeating myself
if I
said much more. I won't keep posting further comments on this
issue but
I hope that the OSM community might help clarify the matter or suggest
an alternate approach.   I have an interest in administrative
boundaries
and I have travelled and mapped in rural and remote parts of NSW,
SA and
other states. I remain disappointed that the Unincorporated Area
of New
South Wales was deleted and I don't wish to see other unincorporated
LGAs deleted either.


___
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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Hi all

I would agree with Warin's latest suggested definition: "The boundary of an
authority that is responsible for local government
 functions within that
boundary."

If there's "something" there, we should be showing it!

Further to Cleary's comment about NSW Legislation, earlier this week I was
looking at the BoM site for NSW & they had put out a weather warning for  the
Unincorporated Area of NSW, so they also think that it exists!

On a similar line (& apologies if it's been discussed & resolved
previously) how do we treat Aboriginal towns? They lie within some form of
"Shire" (presumably Level 6), but then each town is run by it's Local
Community Council. Are they also a Level 6 authority?

Thanks

Graeme
_


On 29 December 2016 at 08:08, cleary  wrote:

>
> I have a different view about whether the unincorporated areas actually
> exist. They have defined boundaries and names, both assigned by the
> respective State governments, and included in the LGA datasets. I have
> seen the boundaries signposted when travelling in rural areas of both
> NSW and SA and the signs are the same as signs identifying shire/city
> boundaries. Governments don't give boundaries, names and signposts to
> entities that do not exist. I do agree that unincorporated areas have
> different and varied governance/administrative arrangements - I
> understand that State governments have considered the different
> arrangements more suitable because the unincorporated areas are more
> sparsely populated and/or have special circumstances. If it is important
> to highlight the different administrative arrangements, then Warin's
> suggestion of additional tags is a good way forward. As the areas do
> actually exist, it seems to me that they warrant being appropriately
> mapped with administrative boundaries, as shown in the State government
> LGA datasets.
>
> After Andrew's earlier comment about references in legislation, I looked
> at NSW legislation. There are a few references to the Unincorporated
> Area of NSW and generally they refer to it as if it were a local
> government area. The most explicit is the Electricity Supply Act 1995
> which states that the legislation "applies to the unincorporated area as
> if (a) references to a local government area were references to the
> unincorporated area, and (b)  references to a local council were
> references to the Western Lands Commissioner" and it makes similar
> provisons in regard to Lord Howe Island and the Lord Howe Island Board.
> For practical purposes the Unincorporated Area of NSW and Lord Howe
> Island appear to be treated as similar and equivalent to areas
> administered by councils.
>
> I don't think I can add anything new and would be repeating myself if I
> said much more. I won't keep posting further comments on this issue but
> I hope that the OSM community might help clarify the matter or suggest
> an alternate approach.   I have an interest in administrative boundaries
> and I have travelled and mapped in rural and remote parts of NSW, SA and
> other states. I remain disappointed that the Unincorporated Area of New
> South Wales was deleted and I don't wish to see other unincorporated
> LGAs deleted either.
>
>
> ___
> 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] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Ben Kelley]

Just my 2c:

To the average map user, it seems that these are pretty much the same 
thing. (Unincorporated areas and local government boundaries.)


While the technical definition is different, I'm not sure that matters 
so much. The 2 don't physically overlap or intersect. I don't see any 
problem with tagging them similarly with regard to admin boundaries.


 - Ben.



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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[cleary]

I have a different view about whether the unincorporated areas actually
exist. They have defined boundaries and names, both assigned by the
respective State governments, and included in the LGA datasets. I have
seen the boundaries signposted when travelling in rural areas of both
NSW and SA and the signs are the same as signs identifying shire/city
boundaries. Governments don't give boundaries, names and signposts to
entities that do not exist. I do agree that unincorporated areas have
different and varied governance/administrative arrangements - I
understand that State governments have considered the different
arrangements more suitable because the unincorporated areas are more
sparsely populated and/or have special circumstances. If it is important
to highlight the different administrative arrangements, then Warin's
suggestion of additional tags is a good way forward. As the areas do
actually exist, it seems to me that they warrant being appropriately
mapped with administrative boundaries, as shown in the State government
LGA datasets.

After Andrew's earlier comment about references in legislation, I looked
at NSW legislation. There are a few references to the Unincorporated
Area of NSW and generally they refer to it as if it were a local
government area. The most explicit is the Electricity Supply Act 1995
which states that the legislation "applies to the unincorporated area as
if (a) references to a local government area were references to the
unincorporated area, and (b)  references to a local council were
references to the Western Lands Commissioner" and it makes similar
provisons in regard to Lord Howe Island and the Lord Howe Island Board.
For practical purposes the Unincorporated Area of NSW and Lord Howe
Island appear to be treated as similar and equivalent to areas
administered by councils.  

I don't think I can add anything new and would be repeating myself if I
said much more. I won't keep posting further comments on this issue but
I hope that the OSM community might help clarify the matter or suggest
an alternate approach.   I have an interest in administrative boundaries
and I have travelled and mapped in rural and remote parts of NSW, SA and
other states. I remain disappointed that the Unincorporated Area of New
South Wales was deleted and I don't wish to see other unincorporated
LGAs deleted either. 


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 28-Dec-16 06:57 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:



On 28/12/16 17:51, cleary wrote:


In suggesting the term "Local Government Area", I was thinking of areas
as shown in the Local Government Areas (LGA) datasets issued by state
and territory governments


The LGA dataset have metadata in them that indicate whether or not an 
area has a form of local administration. This is because the users of 
these datasets may want to know this. In OSM there is no tagging that 
you can use to indicate that the boundary that you've put in doesn't 
have what the admin_level tag indicates. That means that these areas 
are represented in OSM by not putting a boundary around them. This is 
the usual way that you indicate that something doesn't exist in OSM.


This is how the admin_level model works. A admin_level 2 boundary 
should enclose a country. You wouldn't expect to find a admin_level 2 
boundary around the "Tasman Sea International Waters". Admin_level 4 
goes around a state or territory. Admin_level 6 goes around the 
boundaries of a local governing authority. Areas not inside a 
admin_level 6 boundary don't have a form of local administration. In 
the Australian case this means that they are administered from the 
state, territory, or in some cases Commonwealth level.


They still have an 'administration'. And that should be documented in OSM.

The present OSMwiki definition can be changed. And it can be changed to 
include more than places with 'local administration'!


Other than Andrew .. are there any others who have any concerns over 
accepting nonlocal administration of 'local government'?


Possible wording ?
The boundary of an authority that is responsible for local government 
 functions within that 
boundary.


Gets away from having the 'authority' being 'local', 'elected' etc ... 
just that they perform the functions of what a 'local government 
' does.


---
Andrew ...if you require more detail ... then adding additional tags is 
possible e.g

local=yes
elected=yes

and what ever other tags you think are required.




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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 28/12/16 17:51, cleary wrote:


In suggesting the term "Local Government Area", I was thinking of areas
as shown in the Local Government Areas (LGA) datasets issued by state
and territory governments


The LGA dataset have metadata in them that indicate whether or not an 
area has a form of local administration. This is because the users of 
these datasets may want to know this. In OSM there is no tagging that 
you can use to indicate that the boundary that you've put in doesn't 
have what the admin_level tag indicates. That means that these areas are 
represented in OSM by not putting a boundary around them. This is the 
usual way that you indicate that something doesn't exist in OSM.


This is how the admin_level model works. A admin_level 2 boundary should 
enclose a country. You wouldn't expect to find a admin_level 2 boundary 
around the "Tasman Sea International Waters". Admin_level 4 goes around 
a state or territory. Admin_level 6 goes around the boundaries of a 
local governing authority. Areas not inside a admin_level 6 boundary 
don't have a form of local administration. In the Australian case this 
means that they are administered from the state, territory, or in some 
cases Commonwealth level.


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 28/12/16 17:51, cleary wrote:
Perhaps I might

have suggested different wording such as  "local administrative
districts including but not limited to shires, cities and municipalities".



Fine, so long as you understand that none of those terms covers 
unincorporated areas.


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[cleary]

In suggesting the term "Local Government Area", I was thinking of areas
as shown in the Local Government Areas (LGA) datasets issued by state
and territory governments (although, at the moment, I understand we have
permissions only to use datasets from LPI NSW and SA Government Data).
These datasets include areas covered by various pieces of legislation
including but not limited to "local government" acts.  Perhaps I might
have suggested different wording such as  "local administrative
districts including but not limited to shires, cities and
municipalities".






On Sat, Dec 24, 2016, at 05:38 PM, Warin wrote:

> On 24-Dec-16 04:40 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:

>> On 23/12/16 09:50, cleary wrote: 

>> 

>>> 

>>> 

>>> 

>>> I suggest a simple one-word change in the wiki so that Level 6

>>>  administrative boundaries in Australia would read "Local
>>>  Government Area
>>>  Border (e.g Shire/Council)" replacing "Local Government Authority
>>>  Border
>>>  (e.g Shire/Council)" clarifying that we map the area rather
>>>  than the
>>>  form of administration in the area. 

>>> 

>> 

>> I completely agree with this proposed change. It will clarify exactly
>> what is supposed to be represented by an admin_level 6 boundary.
>> 

>>  In NSW the term "local government area" is used in a number of
>>  pieces of legislation because different rules apply if you are in a
>>  local government area than if you are not. As a result there is a
>>  clear and unambiguous definition of what is and what is not a local
>>  government area.
>> 

> 

> Err does this mean there are areas in NSW that have no 'local
> government area'?
>  Or did you mean '*"local government area" is used in a number of
>  pieces of legislation because different rules apply if you are in a
>  local government area or another local government area*' ?
> 

>> 

>> SA doesn't use the term in their legislation but there is a LGA areas
>> dataset available from data.sa.gov.au that defines for each part of
>> SA whether or not it is a local government area.
>> 

>>  Hopefully this will stop the rather tedious debate about what
>>  exactly constitutes a local government authority.
> 

> Personally I would want to get away from the hair splitting and get
> back to mapping.
> 

> _

> 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] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 24-Dec-16 04:40 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:

On 23/12/16 09:50, cleary wrote:




I suggest a simple one-word change in the wiki so that Level 6
administrative boundaries in Australia would read "Local Government Area
Border (e.g Shire/Council)" replacing "Local Government Authority Border
(e.g Shire/Council)" clarifying that we map the area rather than the
form of administration in the area.



I completely agree with this proposed change. It will clarify exactly 
what is supposed to be represented by an admin_level 6 boundary.


In NSW the term "local government area" is used in a number of pieces 
of legislation because different rules apply if you are in a local 
government area than if you are not. As a result there is a clear and 
unambiguous definition of what is and what is not a local government 
area.


Err does this mean there are areas in NSW that have no 'local government 
area'?
Or did you mean '/"local government area" is used in a number of pieces 
of legislation because different rules apply if you are in a local 
government area or another local government area/' ?


SA doesn't use the term in their legislation but there is a LGA areas 
dataset available from data.sa.gov.au that defines for each part of SA 
whether or not it is a local government area.


Hopefully this will stop the rather tedious debate about what exactly 
constitutes a local government authority.


Personally I would want to get away from the hair splitting and get back 
to mapping.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

Lets have a while to think about it... no hurry?

My initial though is that it should be a broader description ..

"Border of a local government 
  or an authority 
performing the functions of a local government 
 (e.g. Cobar Shire 
, Municipality of 
Strathfield 
 , North 
Sydney Council , 
Unincorporated Far West 
 , )  "???


The examples are NSW only ... and should be expanded to other parts. But 
is does include Shire, Municipality and Council examples.


It is a bit verbose.

On 23-Dec-16 09:50 AM, cleary wrote:



Thank you for the feedback about this issue.

I understand that Andrew would prefer non-council LGAs be negatively 
mapped (i.e they constitute areas within a state that are not mapped 
as council LGAs) but I didn't perceive that to be the view of other 
respondents. It would also mean that the names of these areas would 
not appear on the map, defeating one of the purposes of a map.


I suggest a simple one-word change in the wiki so that Level 6 
administrative boundaries in Australia would read "Local Government 
Area Border (e.g Shire/Council)" replacing "Local Government Authority 
Border (e.g Shire/Council)" clarifying that we map the area rather 
than the form of administration in the area.


I looked at the possibility of separating the areas into LGAs 
administered by councils, LGAs administered by other bodies, and LGAs 
without a single administering authority and mapping them with 
different admin_levels but it seems a very clumsy solution.


I also looked again at the model for States and Territories. In that 
category we have three different categories (1) States administered by 
governments with powers independent of the Commonwealth, Territories 
with governments with limited powers and ultimately subject to 
Commonwealth control, and the Jervis Bay Territory which has no single 
administering authority.  All are mapped as admin_level=4 which I 
think is appropriate.  If we think an LGA should not be mapped because 
it does not have an administering authority, would we also delete the 
Jervis Bay Territory for the same reason? I would hope not.


Which brings me back to the simplest solution, changing the term 
"Local Government Authority" to "Local Government Area" in the wiki.


Is this suggestion generally acceptable or could someone else suggest 
a more acceptable solution to the question?





On Thu, Dec 22, 2016, at 08:48 AM, Warin wrote:

On 21-Dec-16 05:10 PM, Warin wrote:

Hummm
How about looking at it from a data consumers view point?
Who would use boundary level 6  and what for?

A resident/occupier/potential purchaser/developer may want to know 
who is the relevant authority for a particular property ...
A new employee many want confirmation of the boundaries of the 
authority they are working for.

 I suppose you could ask a real estate agent (joke) or look in OSM ...
If you are in one of these 'unincorporated areas' then with 
Andrew's' 'rule' you won't get an answer.. not much help.


I would think that the 'rule' is easily expanded to include 
unincorporated areas.
What is/are  the objection/s to this expansion? Other than 'it is 
not in the wiki'.


 On 21-Dec-16 11:35 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote:


It's pretty simple:

1. Admin level 6 boundaries are supposed to enclose a "Local 
Government Authority".


2. In NSW the only form of "Local Government Authority" are 
councils incorporated under the Local Government Act.


3. The areas covered by these councils are "incorporated areas".

4. The three polygons in the LPI dataset labelled "UNINCORPORATED" 
represent areas that are not in the "incorporated areas" and 
therefore have no "Local Government Authority".


5. You don't put boundaries around things that don't exist.


Unincorporated areas exit.
They form a similar role to 'Local Councils'.
The areas do not overlap, in fact sharing the same ways/part 
boundaries.

There would be no data conflict in adding these to boundary level 6.



Looking 
athttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries 

the United kingdom for level 6 boundary has "administrative counties 
/ Unitary authorities 
, City of London"


And the wiki on Unitary authorities 
 says in part "type 
of local authority that has a single tier and is responsible for all 
local government  
functions within its area"









QED.

The SA case is complicated by the existence of the Outback 
Communities Authority. According to the 

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[nwastra]

Your suggestion of …
'the simplest solution, changing the term "Local Government Authority" to 
"Local Government Area" in the wiki. is acceptable’ 
is a good solution for me as all these areas need to appear on the map.
nevw 

> On 23 Dec 2016, at 8:50 AM, cleary  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for the feedback about this issue.
> 
> I understand that Andrew would prefer non-council LGAs be negatively mapped 
> (i.e they constitute areas within a state that are not mapped as council 
> LGAs) but I didn't perceive that to be the view of other respondents. It 
> would also mean that the names of these areas would not appear on the map, 
> defeating one of the purposes of a map.
> 
> I suggest a simple one-word change in the wiki so that Level 6 administrative 
> boundaries in Australia would read "Local Government Area Border (e.g 
> Shire/Council)" replacing "Local Government Authority Border (e.g 
> Shire/Council)" clarifying that we map the area rather than the form of 
> administration in the area.
> 
> I looked at the possibility of separating the areas into LGAs administered by 
> councils, LGAs administered by other bodies, and LGAs without a single 
> administering authority and mapping them with different admin_levels but it 
> seems a very clumsy solution.
> 
> I also looked again at the model for States and Territories. In that category 
> we have three different categories (1) States administered by governments 
> with powers independent of the Commonwealth, Territories with governments 
> with limited powers and ultimately subject to Commonwealth control, and the 
> Jervis Bay Territory which has no single administering authority.  All are 
> mapped as admin_level=4 which I think is appropriate.  If we think an LGA 
> should not be mapped because it does not have an administering authority, 
> would we also delete the Jervis Bay Territory for the same reason? I would 
> hope not.
> 
> Which brings me back to the simplest solution, changing the term "Local 
> Government Authority" to "Local Government Area" in the wiki.
> 
> Is this suggestion generally acceptable or could someone else suggest a more 
> acceptable solution to the question?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016, at 08:48 AM, Warin wrote:
>> On 21-Dec-16 05:10 PM, Warin wrote:
>>> Hummm 
>>> How about looking at it from a data consumers view point? 
>>> Who would use boundary level 6  and what for? 
>>> 
>>> A resident/occupier/potential purchaser/developer may want to know who is 
>>> the relevant authority for a particular property ... 
>>> A new employee many want confirmation of the boundaries of the authority 
>>> they are working for. 
>>>  I suppose you could ask a real estate agent (joke) or look in OSM ... 
>>> If you are in one of these 'unincorporated areas' then with Andrew's' 
>>> 'rule' you won't get an answer.. not much help. 
>>> 
>>> I would think that the 'rule' is easily expanded to include unincorporated 
>>> areas. 
>>> What is/are  the objection/s to this expansion? Other than 'it is not in 
>>> the wiki'. 
>>> 
>>>  On 21-Dec-16 11:35 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote: 
>>> 
 It's pretty simple: 
 
 1. Admin level 6 boundaries are supposed to enclose a "Local Government 
 Authority". 
 
 2. In NSW the only form of "Local Government Authority" are councils 
 incorporated under the Local Government Act. 
 
 3. The areas covered by these councils are "incorporated areas". 
 
 4. The three polygons in the LPI dataset labelled "UNINCORPORATED" 
 represent areas that are not in the "incorporated areas" and therefore 
 have no "Local Government Authority". 
 
 5. You don't put boundaries around things that don't exist. 
>>> 
>>> Unincorporated areas exit.
>>> They form a similar role to 'Local Councils'. 
>>> The areas do not overlap, in fact sharing the same ways/part boundaries. 
>>> There would be no data conflict in adding these to boundary level 6. 
>>> 
>> 
>> Looking 
>> athttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> the United kingdom for level 6 boundary has "administrative counties / 
>> Unitary authorities , City 
>> of London" 
>> 
>> And the wiki on Unitary authorities 
>>  says in part "type of local 
>> authority that has a single tier and is responsible for all local government 
>>  functions within its area" 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
 
 QED.
 
 The SA case is complicated by the existence of the Outback Communities 
 Authority. According to the Office of Local Government it's not included: 
 
 http://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/local_govt 
 . 
 

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[cleary]

Thank you for the feedback about this issue.



I understand that Andrew would prefer non-council LGAs be negatively
mapped (i.e they constitute areas within a state that are not mapped as
council LGAs) but I didn't perceive that to be the view of other
respondents. It would also mean that the names of these areas would not
appear on the map, defeating one of the purposes of a map.


I suggest a simple one-word change in the wiki so that Level 6
administrative boundaries in Australia would read "Local Government Area
Border (e.g Shire/Council)" replacing "Local Government Authority Border
(e.g Shire/Council)" clarifying that we map the area rather than the
form of administration in the area.


I looked at the possibility of separating the areas into LGAs
administered by councils, LGAs administered by other bodies, and LGAs
without a single administering authority and mapping them with different
admin_levels but it seems a very clumsy solution.


I also looked again at the model for States and Territories. In that
category we have three different categories (1) States administered by
governments with powers independent of the Commonwealth, Territories
with governments with limited powers and ultimately subject to
Commonwealth control, and the Jervis Bay Territory which has no single
administering authority.  All are mapped as admin_level=4 which I think
is appropriate.  If we think an LGA should not be mapped because it does
not have an administering authority, would we also delete the Jervis Bay
Territory for the same reason? I would hope not.


Which brings me back to the simplest solution, changing the term "Local
Government Authority" to "Local Government Area" in the wiki.


Is this suggestion generally acceptable or could someone else suggest a
more acceptable solution to the question?








On Thu, Dec 22, 2016, at 08:48 AM, Warin wrote:

> On 21-Dec-16 05:10 PM, Warin wrote:

>> Hummm 

>>  How about looking at it from a data consumers view point? 

>>  Who would use boundary level 6  and what for? 

>> 

>>  A resident/occupier/potential purchaser/developer may want to know
>>  who is the relevant authority for a particular property ...
>>  A new employee many want confirmation of the boundaries of the
>>  authority they are working for.
>>   I suppose you could ask a real estate agent (joke) or look in
>>   OSM ...
>>  If you are in one of these 'unincorporated areas' then with
>>  Andrew's' 'rule' you won't get an answer.. not much help.
>> 

>>  I would think that the 'rule' is easily expanded to include
>>  unincorporated areas.
>>  What is/are  the objection/s to this expansion? Other than 'it is
>>  not in the wiki'.
>> 

>>   On 21-Dec-16 11:35 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote: 

>> 

>>> It's pretty simple: 

>>> 

>>>  1. Admin level 6 boundaries are supposed to enclose a "Local
>>> Government Authority".
>>> 

>>>  2. In NSW the only form of "Local Government Authority" are
>>> councils incorporated under the Local Government Act.
>>> 

>>>  3. The areas covered by these councils are "incorporated areas". 

>>> 

>>>  4. The three polygons in the LPI dataset labelled "UNINCORPORATED"
>>> represent areas that are not in the "incorporated areas" and
>>> therefore have no "Local Government Authority".
>>> 

>>>  5. You don't put boundaries around things that don't exist. 

>> 

>> Unincorporated areas exit.

>>  They form a similar role to 'Local Councils'. 

>>  The areas do not overlap, in fact sharing the same ways/part
>>  boundaries.
>>  There would be no data conflict in adding these to boundary level 6.
>> 

> 

> Looking at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries
>  the United kingdom for level 6 boundary has "administrative counties
>  / Unitary authorities[1], City of London"
> 

>  And the wiki on Unitary authorities[2] says in part "type of local
>  authority that has a single tier and is responsible for all local
>  government[3] functions within its area"
> 

> 

> 

> 

>> 

>>> 

>>> QED.

>>> 

>>>  The SA case is complicated by the existence of the Outback
>>>  Communities Authority. According to the Office of Local Government
>>>  it's not included:
>>> 

>>> http://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/local_govt. 

>>> 

>>>  Which is supported by the fact that the name includes the phrase
>>>  "unincorporated area".
>>> 

>>>  On 2016-12-21 09:15, cleary wrote: 

>>> 

 

 I have been adding administrative boundaries in NSW and SA
 using the
  Government data for which OSM has been given explicit permission.
  I am
  currently working on the "Pastoral Unincorporated Area" in SA and
  another mapper commented that it was inappropriate. I responded
  but my
  response appears not to have satisfied the other mapper.  I then
  found
  that the same mapper had deleted the "Unincorporated Area of New
  South
  Wales" because it was not administered by a 

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 21-Dec-16 05:10 PM, Warin wrote:

Hummm
How about looking at it from a data consumers view point?
Who would use boundary level 6  and what for?

A resident/occupier/potential purchaser/developer may want to know who 
is the relevant authority for a particular property ...
A new employee many want confirmation of the boundaries of the 
authority they are working for.

 I suppose you could ask a real estate agent (joke) or look in OSM ...
If you are in one of these 'unincorporated areas' then with Andrew's' 
'rule' you won't get an answer.. not much help.


I would think that the 'rule' is easily expanded to include 
unincorporated areas.
What is/are  the objection/s to this expansion? Other than 'it is not 
in the wiki'.


 On 21-Dec-16 11:35 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote:

It's pretty simple:

1. Admin level 6 boundaries are supposed to enclose a "Local 
Government Authority".


2. In NSW the only form of "Local Government Authority" are councils 
incorporated under the Local Government Act.


3. The areas covered by these councils are "incorporated areas".

4. The three polygons in the LPI dataset labelled "UNINCORPORATED" 
represent areas that are not in the "incorporated areas" and 
therefore have no "Local Government Authority".


5. You don't put boundaries around things that don't exist.


Unincorporated areas exit.
They form a similar role to 'Local Councils'.
The areas do not overlap, in fact sharing the same ways/part boundaries.
There would be no data conflict in adding these to boundary level 6.


Looking at 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries 

the United kingdom for level 6 boundary has "administrative counties / 
Unitary authorities , 
City of London"


And the wiki on Unitary authorities 
 says in part "type of 
local authority that has a single tier and is responsible for all local 
government  functions 
within its area"








QED.

The SA case is complicated by the existence of the Outback 
Communities Authority. According to the Office of Local Government 
it's not included:


http://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/local_govt.

Which is supported by the fact that the name includes the phrase 
"unincorporated area".


On 2016-12-21 09:15, cleary wrote:


I have been adding administrative boundaries in NSW and SA using the
Government data for which OSM has been given explicit permission. I am
currently working on the "Pastoral Unincorporated Area" in SA and
another mapper commented that it was inappropriate. I responded but my
response appears not to have satisfied the other mapper.  I then found
that the same mapper had deleted the "Unincorporated Area of New South
Wales" because it was not administered by a council.

Both of these "unincorporated" areas are defined and designated in the
respective government datasets, that is (1) South Australian Government
Data - Local Government Areas and (2) LPI NSW Administrative Boundaries
- Local Government.

The issue for the other mapper appears to be the acceptability of the
form of governance of these areas. While the majority of local
government areas are administered by councils, this model works less
well in areas which are sparsely populated. The Pastoral Unincorporated
Area in South Australia is administered by a designated authority, the
Outback Communities Authority, which is not a council either in name or
in the usual sense. I am aware of three other designated local
government areas in South Australia that do not have councils - two are
administered by the indigenous residents although they appear to have
some form of executive committee to make routine decisions. One
designated local government area does not appear to have a council 
and I
have not ascertained the form of governance.  In the Unincorporated 
Area

of New South Wales, responsibilities are dispersed and do not rest with
any one body, for example roads are managed by the Roads and Maritime
Services (state authority) and there are local advisory committees in
some isolated communities.

The key issue is whether the form of governance in an area should
determine whether or not areas should be mapped in OSM. It seems to me
to be akin to removing Northern Territory and ACT on the basis that 
they

have different forms of governance and are not proper states!

The comments on the Pastoral Unincorporated Area can be viewed at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44528330#map=12/-34.3720/140.4687 


The relation for the Pastoral Unincorporated Area is at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6804541
The deleted relation for Unincorporated Area of New South Wales is at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5892272 and refers to Changeset
#44531564

Do other members of the OSM community have a view on whether the 
form of

governance should determine what areas are shown 

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

Hummm
How about looking at it from a data consumers view point?
Who would use boundary level 6  and what for?

A resident/occupier/potential purchaser/developer may want to know who 
is the relevant authority for a particular property ...
A new employee many want confirmation of the boundaries of the authority 
they are working for.

 I suppose you could ask a real estate agent (joke) or look in OSM ...
If you are in one of these 'unincorporated areas' then with Andrew's' 
'rule' you won't get an answer.. not much help.


I would think that the 'rule' is easily expanded to include 
unincorporated areas.
What is/are  the objection/s to this expansion? Other than 'it is not in 
the wiki'.


 On 21-Dec-16 11:35 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote:

It's pretty simple:

1. Admin level 6 boundaries are supposed to enclose a "Local 
Government Authority".


2. In NSW the only form of "Local Government Authority" are councils 
incorporated under the Local Government Act.


3. The areas covered by these councils are "incorporated areas".

4. The three polygons in the LPI dataset labelled "UNINCORPORATED" 
represent areas that are not in the "incorporated areas" and therefore 
have no "Local Government Authority".


5. You don't put boundaries around things that don't exist.


Unincorporated areas exit.
They form a similar role to 'Local Councils'.
The areas do not overlap, in fact sharing the same ways/part boundaries.
There would be no data conflict in adding these to boundary level 6.



QED.

The SA case is complicated by the existence of the Outback Communities 
Authority. According to the Office of Local Government it's not included:


http://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/local_govt.

Which is supported by the fact that the name includes the phrase 
"unincorporated area".


On 2016-12-21 09:15, cleary wrote:


I have been adding administrative boundaries in NSW and SA using the
Government data for which OSM has been given explicit permission. I am
currently working on the "Pastoral Unincorporated Area" in SA and
another mapper commented that it was inappropriate. I responded but my
response appears not to have satisfied the other mapper.  I then found
that the same mapper had deleted the "Unincorporated Area of New South
Wales" because it was not administered by a council.

Both of these "unincorporated" areas are defined and designated in the
respective government datasets, that is (1) South Australian Government
Data - Local Government Areas and (2) LPI NSW Administrative Boundaries
- Local Government.

The issue for the other mapper appears to be the acceptability of the
form of governance of these areas. While the majority of local
government areas are administered by councils, this model works less
well in areas which are sparsely populated. The Pastoral Unincorporated
Area in South Australia is administered by a designated authority, the
Outback Communities Authority, which is not a council either in name or
in the usual sense. I am aware of three other designated local
government areas in South Australia that do not have councils - two are
administered by the indigenous residents although they appear to have
some form of executive committee to make routine decisions. One
designated local government area does not appear to have a council and I
have not ascertained the form of governance.  In the Unincorporated Area
of New South Wales, responsibilities are dispersed and do not rest with
any one body, for example roads are managed by the Roads and Maritime
Services (state authority) and there are local advisory committees in
some isolated communities.

The key issue is whether the form of governance in an area should
determine whether or not areas should be mapped in OSM. It seems to me
to be akin to removing Northern Territory and ACT on the basis that they
have different forms of governance and are not proper states!

The comments on the Pastoral Unincorporated Area can be viewed at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44528330#map=12/-34.3720/140.4687
The relation for the Pastoral Unincorporated Area is at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6804541
The deleted relation for Unincorporated Area of New South Wales is at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5892272 and refers to Changeset
#44531564

Do other members of the OSM community have a view on whether the form of
governance should determine what areas are shown on the map and
particularly whether local government areas should be included if they
are not administered by councils.




___
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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 2016-12-21 16:28, Warin wrote:



:-[
Opps .. line on a map that does not represent what I though it did 
only one in NSW... on the mainland.



Nah, you were right the first time. Lord Howe Island is unincorporated.

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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 21-Dec-16 04:19 PM, Warin wrote:

On 21-Dec-16 04:09 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:

On 2016-12-21 15:57, Daniel O'Connor wrote:

Just want to point out the advice from the wiki:

/Don't map your local legislation, if not bound to objects in reality/
/Things such as local traffic rules should only be mapped through the
objects which represent these rules on the ground, e.g. a traffic sign,
road surface marking. Other rules that can not be seen in some way
should not be mapped, as they are not universally verifiable./

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_area

Can you physically define it? Yes
From survey?  maybe.

I think getting into the details of /who/ or /what/ administers
something is irrelevant; or at least highly marginal compared to the 
/is

it ground truthable?/ parts of it.



Straw men seem to be popular this afternoon. The question is not 
whether or not you map an unincorporated area but how should you map it?


I'm saying that using an admin_level 6 boundary (which is supposed to 
enclose an LGA) is not the correct way to map these areas. They 
should be mapped by mapping all of the LGAs. By doing so the 
unincorporated areas are then represented as those within the 
admin_level 4 boundary but outside of any admin_level 6 boundary.


Then how do you then separate out the TWO  'unincorporated areas' in 
NSW ??



:-[
Opps .. line on a map that does not represent what I though it did  
only one in NSW... on the mainland.


Victoria looks to have a number of them though .. so I think the basic 
question is valid.


How are 'unincorporated areas' to be entered into OSM if not through 
level 6 boundaries ... I note that they share the boundaries of other 
level 6 entries. It would be simplest and easiest to accept them as 
level 6, in the same way that territories are the same level as states.


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 2016-12-21 16:19, Warin wrote:


Then how do you then separate out the TWO  'unincorporated areas' in NSW ??




I don't care...provided that you don't use an admin_level 6 boundary. 
May I suggest admin_level=-6 ?


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Daniel O'Connor]

Straw men seem to be popular this afternoon. The question is not whether or
not you map an unincorporated area but how should you map it?


One of your first actions was deletion from what I understand of the
changesets, after a brief look.

Until now you havent conveyed that message (your concern is how to map)
well.

Consider using more open ended, less accusing language, you might find a
better outcome. Nobody here has a goal of making the map worse.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 21-Dec-16 04:09 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:

On 2016-12-21 15:57, Daniel O'Connor wrote:

Just want to point out the advice from the wiki:

/Don't map your local legislation, if not bound to objects in reality/
/Things such as local traffic rules should only be mapped through the
objects which represent these rules on the ground, e.g. a traffic sign,
road surface marking. Other rules that can not be seen in some way
should not be mapped, as they are not universally verifiable./

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_area

Can you physically define it? Yes
From survey?  maybe.

I think getting into the details of /who/ or /what/ administers
something is irrelevant; or at least highly marginal compared to the /is
it ground truthable?/ parts of it.



Straw men seem to be popular this afternoon. The question is not 
whether or not you map an unincorporated area but how should you map it?


I'm saying that using an admin_level 6 boundary (which is supposed to 
enclose an LGA) is not the correct way to map these areas. They should 
be mapped by mapping all of the LGAs. By doing so the unincorporated 
areas are then represented as those within the admin_level 4 boundary 
but outside of any admin_level 6 boundary.


Then how do you then separate out the TWO  'unincorporated areas' in NSW ??



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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 2016-12-21 15:57, Daniel O'Connor wrote:

Just want to point out the advice from the wiki:

/Don't map your local legislation, if not bound to objects in reality/
/Things such as local traffic rules should only be mapped through the
objects which represent these rules on the ground, e.g. a traffic sign,
road surface marking. Other rules that can not be seen in some way
should not be mapped, as they are not universally verifiable./

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_area

Can you physically define it? Yes
From survey?  maybe.

I think getting into the details of /who/ or /what/ administers
something is irrelevant; or at least highly marginal compared to the /is
it ground truthable?/ parts of it.



Straw men seem to be popular this afternoon. The question is not whether 
or not you map an unincorporated area but how should you map it?


I'm saying that using an admin_level 6 boundary (which is supposed to 
enclose an LGA) is not the correct way to map these areas. They should 
be mapped by mapping all of the LGAs. By doing so the unincorporated 
areas are then represented as those within the admin_level 4 boundary 
but outside of any admin_level 6 boundary.


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Daniel O'Connor]

Just want to point out the advice from the wiki:

*Don't map your local legislation, if not bound to objects in reality*
*Things such as local traffic rules should only be mapped through the
objects which represent these rules on the ground, e.g. a traffic sign,
road surface marking. Other rules that can not be seen in some way should
not be mapped, as they are not universally verifiable.*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_area
Can you physically define it? Yes
>From survey?  maybe.

I think getting into the details of *who* or *what* administers something
is irrelevant; or at least highly marginal compared to the *is it ground
truthable?* parts of it.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 2016-12-21 15:30, Warin wrote:


There is an authority that performs the role of a 'local council' in
these areas ... I don't care what it is called.
There is in effect a 'local council' there, it is not 'no mans' land',
the 'wild west' etc.



Nice straw man there... Who said that no council equals wild west?

Clearly I'm having trouble making this simple enough. So instead have a 
read of this:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unincorporated_area

then have a read of this:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/77214EF6765D0541CA2578D40012CF2E?opendocument

Then think about the title of this thread which is in effect asking how 
do I map a local government area with no local government?


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 2016-12-21 14:53, Warin wrote:

On 21-Dec-16 11:38 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote:

On 2016-12-21 11:01, Warin wrote:

So the governance is irrelevant to the issue ... the area is managed by
'something' ..that 'something'  should be treated the same way in OSM
for the same function.


The area is managed by the State of New South Wales and there is
already a admin_level 4 boundary marking that out.



Taken to the extreme councils are subject to the governance by the State
of New South Wales.


Obviously. They are entirely a creation of a State government act.


For example the amalgamation of councils, placing certain councils into
governance by an unelected official all done by the State Government.


So what? The local government authority still exists even if the council 
is being run by an administrator. Admin_level 6 means that there is a 
local government authority in place, not that it is democratically elected.




These 'unincorporated areas' have some part of the gobermint
administering them ... as such the have an entity preforming at least
some of the actions of a 'local council' (building approvals for example).
The most logical place to have that data in under the 'local government'
section.



We're not mapping with the administrative boundary the areas where there 
are garbage services, building approvals are required, or the streets 
have kerbs and gutters.  We're mapping where there is a local government 
authority in place, and, as it says on the box 'unincorporated area', 
there is no local government authority in these areas.


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 21-Dec-16 11:38 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote:

On 2016-12-21 11:01, Warin wrote:

So the governance is irrelevant to the issue ... the area is managed by
'something' ..that 'something'  should be treated the same way in OSM
for the same function.


The area is managed by the State of New South Wales and there is 
already a admin_level 4 boundary marking that out.




Taken to the extreme councils are subject to the governance by the State 
of New South Wales.
For example the amalgamation of councils, placing certain councils into 
governance by an unelected official all done by the State Government.


These 'unincorporated areas' have some part of the gobermint 
administering them ... as such the have an entity preforming at least 
some of the actions of a 'local council' (building approvals for example).
The most logical place to have that data in under the 'local government' 
section.



Interesting review dated 2013 
http://www.olg.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/Strengthening-Far-West-Communities-Supporting-Information-Volume-3.pdf 






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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

On 2016-12-21 11:01, Warin wrote:

So the governance is irrelevant to the issue ... the area is managed by
'something' ..that 'something'  should be treated the same way in OSM
for the same function.


The area is managed by the State of New South Wales and there is already 
a admin_level 4 boundary marking that out.


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Andrew Davidson]

It's pretty simple:

1. Admin level 6 boundaries are supposed to enclose a "Local Government 
Authority".


2. In NSW the only form of "Local Government Authority" are councils 
incorporated under the Local Government Act.


3. The areas covered by these councils are "incorporated areas".

4. The three polygons in the LPI dataset labelled "UNINCORPORATED" 
represent areas that are not in the "incorporated areas" and therefore 
have no "Local Government Authority".


5. You don't put boundaries around things that don't exist.

QED.

The SA case is complicated by the existence of the Outback Communities 
Authority. According to the Office of Local Government it's not included:


http://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/local_govt.

Which is supported by the fact that the name includes the phrase 
"unincorporated area".


On 2016-12-21 09:15, cleary wrote:


I have been adding administrative boundaries in NSW and SA using the
Government data for which OSM has been given explicit permission. I am
currently working on the "Pastoral Unincorporated Area" in SA and
another mapper commented that it was inappropriate. I responded but my
response appears not to have satisfied the other mapper.  I then found
that the same mapper had deleted the "Unincorporated Area of New South
Wales" because it was not administered by a council.

Both of these "unincorporated" areas are defined and designated in the
respective government datasets, that is (1) South Australian Government
Data - Local Government Areas and (2) LPI NSW Administrative Boundaries
- Local Government.

The issue for the other mapper appears to be the acceptability of the
form of governance of these areas. While the majority of local
government areas are administered by councils, this model works less
well in areas which are sparsely populated. The Pastoral Unincorporated
Area in South Australia is administered by a designated authority, the
Outback Communities Authority, which is not a council either in name or
in the usual sense. I am aware of three other designated local
government areas in South Australia that do not have councils - two are
administered by the indigenous residents although they appear to have
some form of executive committee to make routine decisions. One
designated local government area does not appear to have a council and I
have not ascertained the form of governance.  In the Unincorporated Area
of New South Wales, responsibilities are dispersed and do not rest with
any one body, for example roads are managed by the Roads and Maritime
Services (state authority) and there are local advisory committees in
some isolated communities.

The key issue is whether the form of governance in an area should
determine whether or not areas should be mapped in OSM. It seems to me
to be akin to removing Northern Territory and ACT on the basis that they
have different forms of governance and are not proper states!

The comments on the Pastoral Unincorporated Area can be viewed at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44528330#map=12/-34.3720/140.4687
The relation for the Pastoral Unincorporated Area is at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6804541
The deleted relation for Unincorporated Area of New South Wales is at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5892272 and refers to Changeset
#44531564

Do other members of the OSM community have a view on whether the form of
governance should determine what areas are shown on the map and
particularly whether local government areas should be included if they
are not administered by councils.




___
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] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Warin]

On 21-Dec-16 09:15 AM, cleary wrote:

I have been adding administrative boundaries in NSW and SA using the
Government data for which OSM has been given explicit permission. I am
currently working on the "Pastoral Unincorporated Area" in SA and
another mapper commented that it was inappropriate. I responded but my
response appears not to have satisfied the other mapper.  I then found
that the same mapper had deleted the "Unincorporated Area of New South
Wales" because it was not administered by a council.

Both of these "unincorporated" areas are defined and designated in the
respective government datasets, that is (1) South Australian Government
Data - Local Government Areas and (2) LPI NSW Administrative Boundaries
- Local Government.

The issue for the other mapper appears to be the acceptability of the
form of governance of these areas. While the majority of local
government areas are administered by councils, this model works less
well in areas which are sparsely populated. The Pastoral Unincorporated
Area in South Australia is administered by a designated authority, the
Outback Communities Authority, which is not a council either in name or
in the usual sense. I am aware of three other designated local
government areas in South Australia that do not have councils - two are
administered by the indigenous residents although they appear to have
some form of executive committee to make routine decisions. One
designated local government area does not appear to have a council and I
have not ascertained the form of governance.  In the Unincorporated Area
of New South Wales, responsibilities are dispersed and do not rest with
any one body, for example roads are managed by the Roads and Maritime
Services (state authority) and there are local advisory committees in
some isolated communities.

The key issue is whether the form of governance in an area should
determine whether or not areas should be mapped in OSM. It seems to me
to be akin to removing Northern Territory and ACT on the basis that they
have different forms of governance and are not proper states!


The 'territories' are covered in the OSMwiki as equivalent to states.

My view : if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck ... it is a duck.

So the governance is irrelevant to the issue ... the area is managed by 
'something' ..that 'something'  should be treated the same way in OSM for the 
same function.

So ... my view - change the wiki to reflect 'our' circumstance.


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

Re: [talk-au] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Daniel O'Connor]

Its an interesting one - unlike suburbs, LGAs don't really have a physical
presence or much you can survey; even though they have a spatial
relationship/are often defined by physical features.
For being surveyable... maybe you get a 'welcome to foo shire' sign or two.

I would say that* if an LGA is suitable to be added*, Unincorporated Areas
and other weird things like http://www.ncl.net.au/ (A town owned by a
corporation that provides services *like* an LGA, but isn't legally an LGA)
should be suitable too.


In terms of actually using the data; I find that relying on the ABS data
and treating that as a separate data set is often quite useful. I'd be
inclined to not worry too much about adding them in; particularly when they
do fun things like merge frequently - maintenance pain in the behind and a
half!



On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 8:45 AM, cleary  wrote:

>
> I have been adding administrative boundaries in NSW and SA using the
> Government data for which OSM has been given explicit permission. I am
> currently working on the "Pastoral Unincorporated Area" in SA and
> another mapper commented that it was inappropriate. I responded but my
> response appears not to have satisfied the other mapper.  I then found
> that the same mapper had deleted the "Unincorporated Area of New South
> Wales" because it was not administered by a council.
>
> Both of these "unincorporated" areas are defined and designated in the
> respective government datasets, that is (1) South Australian Government
> Data - Local Government Areas and (2) LPI NSW Administrative Boundaries
> - Local Government.
>
> The issue for the other mapper appears to be the acceptability of the
> form of governance of these areas. While the majority of local
> government areas are administered by councils, this model works less
> well in areas which are sparsely populated. The Pastoral Unincorporated
> Area in South Australia is administered by a designated authority, the
> Outback Communities Authority, which is not a council either in name or
> in the usual sense. I am aware of three other designated local
> government areas in South Australia that do not have councils - two are
> administered by the indigenous residents although they appear to have
> some form of executive committee to make routine decisions. One
> designated local government area does not appear to have a council and I
> have not ascertained the form of governance.  In the Unincorporated Area
> of New South Wales, responsibilities are dispersed and do not rest with
> any one body, for example roads are managed by the Roads and Maritime
> Services (state authority) and there are local advisory committees in
> some isolated communities.
>
> The key issue is whether the form of governance in an area should
> determine whether or not areas should be mapped in OSM. It seems to me
> to be akin to removing Northern Territory and ACT on the basis that they
> have different forms of governance and are not proper states!
>
> The comments on the Pastoral Unincorporated Area can be viewed at
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44528330#map=12/-34.3720/140.4687
> The relation for the Pastoral Unincorporated Area is at
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6804541
> The deleted relation for Unincorporated Area of New South Wales is at
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5892272 and refers to Changeset
> #44531564
>
> Do other members of the OSM community have a view on whether the form of
> governance should determine what areas are shown on the map and
> particularly whether local government areas should be included if they
> are not administered by councils.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Local Government Areas without Councils

[Alex Sims]

Speaking of SA only I would define the LGA locations administered by the 
Outback Communities Authority as Unincorporated as
- thats how other hierarchies used by Government, ABS etc define it, and every 
point in SA is either in an LGA or Unincorporated
- Unincorporated means Outback Communities Authority does your bins, dog 
registration, planning, etc

The Pitjantjatjara lands I would define as not Unincorporated as "Anangu 
Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara” in the LGA level as that body peforms the 
equivalent function to an LGA, and it is not covered by the Outback Communities 
Authority so its not Unincorporated but not an LGA but something else that 
sites underneath the State. Similar Logic for Maralinga etc.

Alex

> On 21 Dec 2016, at 8:45 am, cleary  wrote:
> 
> 
> I have been adding administrative boundaries in NSW and SA using the
> Government data for which OSM has been given explicit permission. I am
> currently working on the "Pastoral Unincorporated Area" in SA and
> another mapper commented that it was inappropriate. I responded but my
> response appears not to have satisfied the other mapper.  I then found
> that the same mapper had deleted the "Unincorporated Area of New South
> Wales" because it was not administered by a council.
> 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


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