[talk-au] Australian Rendering

[John Smith]

--- On Mon, 3/8/09, Darrin Smith <beldin at beldin.org> wrote:

> That's a given for any 2 people.
> However how the same thing is store in OSM in 2 different
> areas is
> the same. And that is what we are talking about here.

Ok, to do this objectively we could either mark an area as a different admin_level based on population of each boundary, or store the actual population of a boundary as of the last census, either way we'd be able to differentiate the areas.

Alternatively who said we only have to have one set of map tiles, we can have 10 different map styles for all it matters, I just need to tweak things on the server for different host names for different tile sets.

The javascript already has the ability to use different map styles as well so it should be pretty trivial to do both things we want :)


> By "represented" I meant in the OSM data. The underlying
> data should be 
> consistent.

To do this objectively we just need to stipulate the population then we can achieve the same result I'm after by suggesting subjective methods.

> These areas are of the same importance, they are the
> geographical name 
> divisions that lie within post codes.

The importance of various bits of map info is subjective and what's important to you isn't important to me, but that's irrelevant since we can do 2 sets of map tiles to please us both with different style sheets.

The mapnik style sheets cascade, similar to css, so it will be trivial to do 2 similar style sheets covering admin boundaries and a main style sheet with the same features we both want.

> They are not a point, they are a named area, documented in
> the states 
> naming registry and everyone who lives in those areas lives
> in that 
> named location.

Naming them as localities would then make them show the name, I hate how the boundaries name shows up on a map even if there is a place marker.

> Yes, that's been talked about before, they're the best
> we've got now, we 
> fix them up when we know more about them.

> Please read what I am saying. I did not say "Not all the
> ABS data has 
> names" I said "the ABS data doesn't have all the names".
> There are even 
> more of these names in existance than the ABS data would
> lead you to 
> believe.

Sorry I meant for all the boundaries I've inspected they seem to be named, I didn't mean to imply they all have names, but just based on what I've seen they've been named.
 
> I you really want them accurate you still need to survey,

I wasn't suggesting otherwise, however in a lot of administrative boundaries unless you know where the boundary is due to living on them or being in council you won't know where they are to fix them.

> I've found 
> plenty of cases where ABS data doesn't match exactly what's
> on the 
> ground. But it's a darn sight better than what has existed
> before.

Ditto for various reasons.

PS the maccas at nambour now has free wifi, it wasn't last time I was here.