Hi all, A great discussion and can I thank Dian for raising this. *Postcodes* As well as SteveA's comments, postcode boundaries are proprietary and Auspost are never going to sign a waiver or have it as an open source service and no, I don't really understand this logic. The best you can get is an "interpretation" of postcodes every 5 years from the ABS. Auspost don't have a process to identify alterations within those five years (assuming the ABS postcodes are very close) so we are really up a creek without a paddle postcode wise.
*Indigenous nations/country* I have a strong belief that we should allocate an entry around level three to six for indigenous country. There will be discussion on fuzziness of boundaries and ownership, a number of these have been resolved already by the Registered Aboriginal Parties (RAP) for an area however I don't see that being a huge issue. My key issue is appropriation of the country and area polygons for the ability for others to commercialise this or reduce the purchasing of indigenous materials. I don't see that all RAPs and others would update the map, however I see having the ability to add this data and be able to index it, is important to OSM in Australia. Ewen On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 10:53, stevea <stevea...@softworkers.com> wrote: > I will and do (cautiously, as an "outsider" from the USA, but as an > "insider" being one who seriously coordinated the USA [1] getting our 4-10 > admin_level table(s) [2] about as hammered-into-submission-and-consensus as > is humanly OSM-possible, over months and years and sweat and tears) say one > thing: > > Assigning admin_level=8 to Postcode Borders simply isn't correct. Mail > delivery areas are not administrative boundaries. They might be > convenient, but they should be boundary=postal_code, not > boundary=admin_level (see, that is a direct collision in the key boundary > for exactly the right reason: one is not the other). > > (In the USA, postal_codes, what we call ZIP Codes — Zone/Improvement/Plan > — are more like routing algorithms for efficient mail delivery. They > absolutely do not describe geographic regions and it is essentially > geographically impossible to make them do so). > > The other proposed changes to Australia's table? I step aside, good > Australian OSM Contributors. > > SteveA > > [1] https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/United_States_admin_level > [2] https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/United_States/Boundaries > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > -- Warm Regards Ewen Hill
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
