[talk-au] I deleted a few locality boundaries...

[Ross Scanlon]

On 19/12/11 19:24, Ian Sergeant wrote:
> On 19 December 2011 11:50, Ross Scanlon <info at 4x4falcon.com
> <mailto:info at 4x4falcon.com>> wrote:
>
>     As I said and it's been said many times before other items should
>     not be attached to boundaries.
>
>
> If a boundary IS a coastline, sharing a way isn't wrong.  Would you
> really create two ways that are fully coincident?

The original coastlines were from NASA PGS data and if they have been 
deleted and/or merged to the ABS data then the coastline is going to be 
deleted as well.

>     There is details on the wiki about separating the rivers etc from
>     the boundaries.  Look under Australian Tagging Guidelines.
>
>
> I'm sure I could find another wiki page which says the opposite.  The
> sharing object debate is as old as OSM.

Not what I'm talking about.  If someone wants to unattach the 
road/river/rail data then it suggests how to.

> As for the relevance to ABS import - if a river location is derived from
> non-CT data, it should be deleted as it is derived from a work that
> hasn't been relicenced.  This applies whether the river and the boundary
> share an object or not - makes no difference.

Agree.

Cheers
Ross