[talk-au] Suburb boundaries

BlueMM bluemm1975-osm at yahoo.com
Tue Feb 17 03:08:16 GMT 2009


Darrin Smith <beldin at ...> writes:
[SNIP]
> 
> Franc has forwarded me the suburbs I requested and I've had a look.
> From my first look over them I've come to the following conclusions:
[SNIP]
> - Where the boundaries follow roads they are all pretty close to
> the roads, but generally down one side, which means the roads will only
> appear in one of the suburbs doing any kind of search doing this data.
> This can be fixed whichever path we choose by adjusting the
> way/relation to follow the road.
> 
[SNIP]
> 
> - There are a few subtle weird boundary things at some intersections
> where it closely follows one edge of the road (even following the left
> turn lane edges at one point of a side road off Main North Road), which
> aren't really accurate against any other data I can compare it with.
> Again there will be a need to review these and tidy things up.

This maybe because some suburb boundaries are along the edge of one side of the
road, not down the centre (like the VIC/NSW border along the Murray, on the high
water line on the Vic side). I didn't realise it even took into account
slip-lanes! Either way, it's about as official as we can get, so I hope they
don't get moved around in OSM because someone thought they would look better.
Hopefully, in practise the boundaries are effectively read-only until the next
import, except actual data errors.

> This all leads me to the conclusion we need to consider some kind of
> system akin to the TIGER import where all ABS imported data is flagged
> with an abs:reviewed=no tag (Or some similar setup) which gets
> changed/removed when someone tidies up these kinds of issues so that
> the next ABS import in 4 years knows to not fiddle with these ways or
> work out some other solution to flag for review, a problem for 4 years
> time ;) Of course as soon as the way is moved it's not quite the ABS
> data any more, but still derived/confirmed by it so we need a tag to
> put on those ways to signify this to keep things attributed.
> 
> It does look like it's a good 90% start to getting all the suburb data
> in there though, it puts us *way* ahead of where our current suburb
> data is.
> 
> Another thought is that given a large portion of .au (all the major
> cities afaik, happy to be corrected) have postcodes aligned with
> suburb boundaries do we even need to do a data import of those or can
> we build the postcode boundaries on top of the suburb boundaries? 

addr:postcode=xyz on the boundary seems appropriate here, means we don't double
up on boundaries :-)

BlueMM





More information about the Talk-au mailing list