In regard to administrative boundaries being attached to other features such as 
waterways and roads, I think it is a trade-off between accuracy and 
convenience. 

I am most familiar with NSW. Boundaries are not "defined" by words but rather 
by surveyors' charts. The surveyors may often have been directed to use 
waterways, roads, mountain ridges and similar features for their surveys. 
However the waterways and roads have sometimes/often moved but the boundaries 
have not.  Words are sometimes used to describe boundaries such as "it follows 
the river and then goes south along the main road ... " Such a description is 
approximate and is near enough for many purposes, especially if one's area of 
interest is well within the boundaries. However it may not be sufficiently 
precise if one is concerned with particular locations close to the boundaries.

Examples in NSW that might be considered include the boundary on the Murray 
River west of Tocumwal, the Lachlan River east of Cobb Highway, Willandra Creek 
south of Roto, Bogan River at Girilambone. If the boundaries were attached to 
the respective waterways, either the boundaries or the waterways would be 
incorrect. Where boundaries are mapped on rivers or roads, mappers may re-align 
the river or road as changes occur and the administraitve boundary becomes 
distorted, sometimes only slightly but usually increasingly significant over 
time. Alternatively we could map the waterway or road using the administrative 
boundary data (as some mappers have done in the past) and ignore the satellite 
imagery and GPS data but this affects the accuracy of the location of the 
waterway or road.

While I will accept the community's group decision, personally I think accuracy 
is to be valued over convenience.  I strongly advocate for accuracy by mapping 
administrative boundaries separate from other features on the map, even if they 
are nearby.  

The decision in regard to the above issue will affect use of a source tag for 
the boundary. If the boundary is an approximation and attached to waterways or 
roads then it would be incorrect to use a boundary source tag, However if 
boundaries are mapped separately and accurately, then we should record the 
source of the boundary data. While I would suggest adding the source tag to the 
relation for the administrative boundary, it might also be added to the way if 
there is any need to specify the source for the way e.g. if using the 
administrative boundary for the geography of a river, then also give the source 
of the boundary data as the source for the waterway.





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

Reply via email to