On 1 April 2016 at 23:55, Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> wrote: > If healthcare is chosen, could any validating/completion/geojson websites > created be based around local authority boundaries rather than post-code > areas. Any databases would be LA based.
I think the Health datasets are more likely to be categorised by Health Authority (or CCG or whatever they're called these days) boundaries, which probably don't correspond with Local Government boundaries. Personally, I think postcode areas/districts are good, since we can use them for anything that has an address, and they tend to lead to nice sized areas based on population (and hence amenity) densities. > For the schools project I found the post code list awkward to compare > against other datasets, such as the LA defined food hygiene. Also quite a > few missing schools were well outside the boundary, I couldn't work out why: > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/schools/progress/BA/ What were you trying to do with the Food Hygiene data? Presumably you can search by postcode too can't you? Or are you using the downloads and the files are just by LA district areas? Would it be helpful if someone compiled all the data and made postal area extracts? Are there any other reasons to use LA boundaries rather than postcodes? The presence of the red markers (OSM objects not matched to something in the official data) outside the postal area on e.g. http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/schools/progress/BA/ is because I've jut used a simple rectangular bounding box around the postal area to extract the OSM objects from my working database. It could be made more sophisticated, but there didn't seem much point, as those red markers don't contribute to the "matching percentage" stats, and it's easy enough to visually exclude them when looking at how much of an area has been fixed. Robert. -- Robert Whittaker _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
