Oops, I think i was a little to quick for response on that one. Im now adding in the Aboriginal lands on Vancouver Island, so im seeing lots of variety.
Basically, we should treat this boundary ... no matter where it is... land/water / straddling provinces/countries .. or thin strips of land as it is, in face value. Even if the boundary goes over provincial parks. ... because the truth is, we have no idea what the original 'intent' of whoever it was that drew in those lines were. And we dont know the sources eithor. Sometimes boundaries are drawn to reflect the curves of water, or mountain peaks, and very interesting shapes. ... like the one here looks to be in the shape of an animal head. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=55940136 But anyway, there hasn't been much activity about the tag. Probably because it is a difficult question :) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Daboriginal_lands So i would recommend leaving the polygons the way they are and making sure to NOT have it touch land features (because it's invisable) ... But of course, if signs are seen, they should be mapped, as it helps. In some cases the roads are owned by the local town, others they are not. (if there are signs marking access restrictions, then they should be mapped) otherwise, default road types seems to be the way togo. .. So anyway, whats great about this dataset, is that for the 1st time, we can have a map that shows all the boundaries everywhere :) .. Once the cities/town donates their property boundaries file, we could then see discrepancies. .. but again, we have no idea on what is more accurate or the method used. It is worth noting however, that GeoBase / Natural resources Canada is constantly improving on this dataset. And there are DIFF files that will become available. The version i used as 2_0 . there is a whole read-up on it http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/data/admin/alta/description.html and details of meta data where April 7th 2010 was the last update, and it looks to be monthly updates. http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/metadata.do?id=37285 So my summery of the english translation is that ... its ... well, simply all over the map. :) Fortunately, it is listed in the canvec set as nodes, so that will be 1 way to cross them off the list. (as it can be viewed with Toporama) cheers, Sam P.S. For the encoding error, if anyone wants to convert the set again, they are welcome to :-) and i'll just hide this set once a better version is available. On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Adam Dunn <dunna...@gmail.com> wrote: > Taking a look at BC 0006.osm, some questions (I've also imported/uploaded > the following examples so others can see): > Looking at Skowkale 10 [1] and Upper Sumas 6 [2], both of these reserves > have multiple exclaves. They're essentially one large reserve (each) that > has been carved up into pieces because public roads run through them. I > don't know much about aboriginal land treaties (perhaps each of those pieces > really *should* be separate), but perhaps they should be tagged using the > example of "Use Case: More than one (disjunct) outer ring" from [3]. > Enclaves (inner/outer polygons) seem to be handled correctly, but exclaves > (outer/outer) are not. Is it possible to do this with the script? > > Looks like there's some encoding errors for the Pekw'xe:yles reserve [4]. > The name:fr tag has value with É in it. Should this be an e with accent > aigu (accute accent) "é", or something else? Any fix for the script for > that? > > [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602814 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602810 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602805 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602799 > > [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602817 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602813 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602811 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602809 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602803 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602802 > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602801 > > [3] > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon#Advanced_multipolygons > [4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55602816 > > Adam > > ** > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Sam Vekemans < > acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> I now have the rest of the province's aboriginal lands .osm files >> available. >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geobase/Canadian_Aboriginal_Lands#Rules >> >> Nunavut is probably the largest file with 15 .osm files in the set, but i >> dont think there is much interference, so it shouldn't be to hard to upload. >> >> Also, (as i mentioned before) some of the tags might need to be changed >> (if you can think of something better). It's easy to change the tags, in >> the for each of the .osm files (just select all of the polygons & change the >> tags :) >> >> Also, looking at the geobase website, these files do get updated a bit >> more frequently. But there is a DIFF file that is available, so the script >> can be run on that file, after all the lands have been uploaded. >> >> The recommended use, is to just drop in the data for your local area that >> your working on.. ... since others might want to drop in data for their >> own area also. (im contacting local area mappers as i go along, so im >> trying to make sure i dont interfere with what they are mapping) >> >> >> Cheers, >> Sam >> >> >> Twitter: @Acrosscanada >> Blogs: http://acrosscanadatrails.posterous.com/ >> http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans >> Skype: samvekemans >> OpenStreetMap IRC: http://irc.openstreetmap.org >> @Acrosscanadatrails >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-ca mailing list >> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
