On 28 April 2014 14:23, Michael Gratton m...@vee.net wrote:
So you are saying the ABS suburb boundaries should be checked individually
rather than imported en mass? How do you know that the quality of the
GNB/Wikipedia/etc data is any better than that of the ABS dataset where they
disagree?
On Mon, 28 Apr, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 28 April 2014 14:23, Michael Gratton m...@vee.net wrote:
So you are saying the ABS suburb boundaries should be checked
individually
rather than imported en mass? How do you know that the quality of
the
On 28 Apr 2014, at 10:48 pm, Michael Gratton m...@vee.ne
So how accurate does it have to be? For example, I just downloaded Andrew's
ABS OSM converted datafile (thanks Andrew!), loaded it into JOSM, and have
been eyeballing the differences for the ABS version of Randwick with the LPI
On 28 Apr 2014, at 1:53 pm, Michael Gratton m...@vee.net wrote:
On a related note, what's the appropriate way to map suburb-sized areas that
are partitions? A way for each suburb that share nodes along common borders,
a way for each suburb that don't duplicate nodes along common borders, or
On 29 April 2014 11:02, Alex Sims a...@softgrow.com wrote:
I’d prefer relations that depend on single ways, this avoids JOSM
complaining too much about duplicate ways and can also tie into the
definition in words that might belong in Wikipedia.
Yes. I general I do too.
However, we should
I have intentions of following the British structure for QLD boundaries (no
permission to use this dataset yet). Boundary is the chosen type there:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1464290
multipolygon, though, is winning that race it seems:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/type
On 29 April 2014 12:56, Jason Ward jasonjwa...@gmail.com wrote:
I have intentions of following the British structure for QLD boundaries (no
permission to use this dataset yet). Boundary is the chosen type there:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1464290
multipolygon, though, is winning
7 matches
Mail list logo
