[Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Neighbourhood Plan Import
tom at acrewoods.net
Tue Apr 23 10:41:35 UTC 2013
On 23 April 2013 10:55, Andy Robinson <ajrlists at gmail.com> wrote:
> Copied also to talk-gb.
> The problem is where do we stop? The majority of present/potential boundary
> data doesn't have a physical presence on the ground. Consider ONS Lower,
> middle and other output area boundaries or the NAPTAN charging areas that
> were added with the NAPTAN import. Arguably they are useful in the same way
> as ward boundaries are but should they be in OSM? Because the number of
> nonphysical boundaries or areas is potentially limitless I'm in favour of
> keeping them out of OSM because there is little chance of the average
> verifying them or interacting with them (in relation to other objects).
> Perhaps it's time to have nonphysical boundaries pulled from some other
If somebody wanted to set-up a separate database for nonphysical boundaries
that mappers can't easily verify on the ground in relation to physical
objects, I'm sure people would be interested in using it.
Even if somebody did set this up, the problem would be that the boundaries
and OSM databases wouldn't be linked. So if I tweak some street layouts,
the boundaries database would need to be updated to match that. Linking
them would probably be a technical hurdle too far.
This is one reason I put in ward boundaries for Southwark. I could just use
the OS boundary line dataset, but it's very useful having a precise
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-GB