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
<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
