I agree with reverting the changes in the wiki in regard to Administrative Boundaries.
Mike King's comments supporting boundaries for (1) country, (2) state, (3) LGA and (4) suburb are consistent with general usage in the wider community and with previous usage in OSM. There are other "administrative" boundaries established by governments but they are for specialised purposes such as counties and parishes used for property titles, land districts for regulating agriculture, health districts defining which body administers health services in designated areas, "regions, commands and districts" for administering police services, "school education areas" for administering schools and, no doubt, "administrative boundaries" for many other government services at both state and federal levels. However these are really special purpose boundaries which don't belong on the main map, or could be mapped as something other than administrative if there were a reason to include them in OSM. In regard to levels, I had a quick look at other countries but government systems seem too different for me to make broad comparisons. I am a little familiar with Ireland where counties roughly correlate in size and in some functionality with LGAs in Australia. In Ireland, counties are tagged as level 6. In the U.K, counties seem to be generally mapped as level 6 except in Metropolitan areas in England. I had previously perceived level 6 as appropriate for LGAs in Australia and cannot see any reason or need to change it. Further, I am reluctant to move LGAs to a lower level as they are significant in the Australian systems of government. Some individual LGAs in NSW have larger populations than the whole of the Northern Territory. Brisbane City LGA has a population much greater than the whole of Tasmania and not much less than that of South Australia. In terms of area, I believe there is one LGA in Western Australia that has a larger area than the whole of Victoria. I would prefer to have LGAs in Australia at not lower than level 6. I think most suburbs have been mapped as level 10 and that seems OK to me but I have no problem with changing to level 9 if that were agreed. Unless we are intending to map something else at level 10, it doesn't really matter. As I wrote above - I support mapping country, states (& territories), LGAs and suburbs as administrative boundaries so I do not see anything at a lower level being included in Australian administrative boundaries. So I suggest we stick with State and Territory at level 4 LGA at level 6 suburb at level 10 On Wed, 2 Sep 2020, at 4:06 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote: > On 2/09/2020 10:38 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > > > Did a bit of searching & it appears it was only changed on 15/7/20, but > > no, I certainly don't remember any discussion? > > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Admin_level_10&diff=prev&oldid=2012028 > > > > Makes reference to "Australian Tagging Review (2012 / 2016)", but that > > doesn't help me much either? > > Sigh. > > He is a serial offender: > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-October/013009.html > > There was no discussion. I'd suggest that the changes to the wiki page > should be reverted. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
