[talk-au] place=? An oldie but no past conclusion.

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Tue May 3 22:41:17 UTC 2016

On 4/05/2016 12:50 AM, Christopher Barham wrote:
>> On 03 May 2016, at 14:22, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:61sundowner at gmail.com>> wrote:
> <SNIP>
>> Why judge on the population?
>> Larger populations get more services - Police, Medical, Education ... 
>> they go hand in hand.
>> Populations are usually stated - on the entry signs to towns, 
>> villages .. and collected by the ABS. So verifiable and accessible.
>> Yes they do change .. but not by vast amounts quickly.
>> Usually the relationship between population centres remains fairly 
>> static .. if one grows so do the surrounding ones.
>> Much easier to quickly asses and correctly tag this way. So it 
>> satisfies the KISS principle.
> </SNIP>
> City is not just a function of population - It’s can also be a 
> political appointment/status? - e.g. Charters Towers and Redcliffe are 
> cities : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Australia

Yes there is an 'official designation system' ... subject to political 
pressure and separate rules for each state.
I think the best guide we have is the population, certainly I think it 
is much better than the officially given 'status'.

I did leave out of the original post that the ABS data may include more 
'cities' with populations over 10,000 than the present OSM data base 
contains ... yet to sort that out.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20160504/311c8c89/attachment.html>

More information about the Talk-au mailing list