[talk-au] I deleted a few locality boundaries...
info at 4x4falcon.com
Mon Dec 19 12:10:08 GMT 2011
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.
More information about the Talk-au