[Talk-us] Boundaries and verifiability (was Re: Retagging hamlets in the US)

Kevin Kenny kkenny2 at nycap.rr.com
Tue Mar 24 13:46:28 UTC 2015


On 03/23/2015 12:29 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> The nice thing about mapping a "neighborhood name" as a point feature is:
>
> a) It helps people locate the neighborhood
> b) it completely sidesteps the question of the exact, possibly fuzzy, 
> boundaries.
>
> For 10% of the hassle you map 90% of the benefit.

Or follow the obvious rule:  Let the local mappers decide.

Use point features for indeterminate things.

In areas where neighborhoods have borders that are identifiable on the 
ground, map the borders. Some neighborhoods are gated. Some are signed. 
Some, all the locals understand, are bounded by major streets. Many 
subdivisions, even if not signed, have homogeneous enough architecture 
that the borders are obvious. And some cities try to foster neighborhood 
identity and specifically identify neighborhoods, even where the 
neighborhoods are not legal political entities.

Don't decide as an armchair mapper that you know better than the locals. 
This goes double for using a mechanical edit to "fix" what the locals 
have done. Fix only what you can see is wrong on the ground (or what you 
can't see on the ground at all). This sort of fixing requires boots on 
the ground. (I'm willing to allow an exception for repairing the damage 
done by ill-advised mechanical edits - but only after consultation with 
the locals.)

-- 
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin




More information about the Talk-us mailing list