[Talk-GB] OS Boundaries

Lester Caine lester at lsces.co.uk
Mon Apr 19 18:14:47 BST 2010


Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 19/04/10 17:18, Chris Hill wrote:
>
>> Each boundary needs to share nodes with adjacent ones. County and
>> district boundaries will also need to share nodes, so the process of
>> loading them individually might be quite tedious, and would involve
>> dealing with any existing boundaries. Working on improving county
>> boundaries might be a good place to start.
>
> Ideally they also need to be done as relations and share ways with
> adjacent ones. Indeed it would be good if they shared ways with any
> existing features (such as rivers) where appropriate...

But well mapped rivers don't have ways down their middle ... So the general rule 
SHOULD still be to provide linear features suitable for a particular job rather 
than trying to reuse something which may only be roughly appropriate. But then I 
don't accept that merging ways just because they have the same xy coordinates is 
correct anyway. You need the ability to move each feature individually to allow 
for changes in them over time. Even more important, we need a way to maintain 
historic information such as '1995 boundary' where later boundaries are 
different. So including OS data on its own 'layer' with it's own set of ways 
seems much more correct to me. The same with similar data from other countries.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php




More information about the Talk-GB mailing list