[talk-au] I deleted a few locality boundaries...
richard at weait.com
Sun Dec 18 14:20:36 GMT 2011
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 12:43 AM, El Segundo Can't win
<el_segundo_cant_win at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> I deleted a few locality boundaries in my local area, because they were
> irritating me and getting in the way of re-mapping all the tainted ways and
> I thought I would rebuild them using actual streets and other physical
> boundaries (this is my local area, I know where they are), rather than the
> under and in the way thing that most locality boundaries are, plus they'd be
> CT compliant to boot.
The discussion on attaching boundaries to physical objects appears on
other local lists and talk@ and dev@ at various times. Lots of
opinions. :-) And quite some variation in personal mapping styles.
> but then I thought, maybe I should take the big picture and wait for a new
> import, maybe even an official gazetted locality dataset. It would certainly
> save me time right now. If I do that though, the plain deletion could be
> seen as vandalism.
I think combining the boundary deletion with remapping is
not-vandalism. Cleanup by a local mapper, while attending to the data
is much better than purging by a script, in my opinion.
> I don't think doing both is a great idea, because any boundaries I build
> will just be an annoyance when/if an import is done.
> Are there any opinions on the matter, strong or not?
I'd like to see "somebody" document a quick and easy way to access
official boundary data outside the OSM DB. Mapnik could display the
boundaries as a layer when desired by the consumer. Nominatim can
search w.r.t. external sources. $something is used to make your local
postgis queries do the right thing.
This sounds harder than just putting the boundary data in the OSM DB.
But keeping a local OSM DB up to date also sounded hard until minutely
mapnik and replication diffs were created. Suddenly it doesn't seem
More information about the Talk-au