Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

I'm mighty obliged to you for that excellent synopsis; thank you. Yes, at a certain point such "proposals" have to "be discussed amongst yourselves," of course, I've seen this and you are in a "certain stage" of such things. Then there is your primer on "Aussie 2, 4, 6," excellent. Yeh, the

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

Hi Steve, You are looking in the right spot, although the confusion is understandable-the proposal (for lack of a better word) is for ACT Districts to be moved from Level 7 to Level 5, and for the other "districts" to not be included at all. Forgive me if I over-explain some of these

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

See, what I'm getting at is saying ACT District is 5, yet 7 means District, well, that ambiguity trips me up. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

On Apr 10, 2022, at 5:53 PM, Dian Ågesson wrote: > Thanks Andrew, > > I'll make the adjustments to level 7 and 9 in the update guidelines as I > prepare them. > > I can also add the Districts of the ACT in at Level 5 as well, although > should it be documented for all states' counties? >

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

Thanks Andrew, I'll make the adjustments to level 7 and 9 in the update guidelines as I prepare them. I can also add the Districts of the ACT in at Level 5 as well, although should it be documented for all states' counties?

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

Speaking from personal experience as only one participant over many years (between say, 2012 with some agreement in 2015 and some refinement 2020) in a big country with a lot of states and dozens of their idiosyncrasies, getting admin_level values "right" can be a true, multi-year-long wrangle

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

On 8/4/22 21:57, Dian Ågesson wrote: Hey Andrew, I don’t believe anything was decided with regards to ACT districts. However, after looking into the details I don’t think they actually fit in the administration boundary set up at all; seems closer to parishes/counties on other states than a

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

Hey Andrew, I don't believe anything was decided with regards to ACT districts. However, after looking into the details I don't think they actually fit in the administration boundary set up at all; seems closer to parishes/counties on other states than a "council" or locality. Dian On

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 09:33, Dian Ågesson wrote: > Hey all, > > Resurrecting this thread to see if there are any objections to > implementing the following changes as part of the cleanup: > > > -Removing admin_level=7 > Was there a resolution for Andrew Davidson's comment about ACT districts

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

Hey all, Resurrecting this thread to see if there are any objections to implementing the following changes as part of the cleanup: -Removing admin_level=7 -Moving localities to admin_level=9 Dian On 2021-12-04 22:29, Dian Ågesson wrote: Hey Andrew, Forgive my ignorance; how should we

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

Hey Andrew, Forgive my ignorance; how should we approach the Nominatim team? I'm more than happy to do so, I just don't know where to go. Dian On 2021-11-30 09:21, Andrew Davidson wrote: On 30/11/21 09:55, Andrew Harvey wrote: Since we don't have formally defined boundaries for

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 20:26, Andrew Davidson wrote: > > I checked via the overpass wizard query "admin_level=8 in AU" and there > > are no results, so no australia post borders are mapped that way, and > > I'm not aware of any. > > I think that was an accident of history. boundary=postal_code

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

On 30/11/21 09:55, Andrew Harvey wrote: Since we don't have formally defined boundaries for place=region,district,city,quarter,neighbourhood,city_block should we be adding an admin_level at all? So should we remove 7/5? I'd be happy to get rid of admin_level 7. It never really had a good

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

From my (admittedly limited) understanding, there are several different forms of recognition and ownership of land by Australia's First Peoples, and it varies from state to state. I don't believe the specific boundary=administrative tag is appropriate for any of the use cases, but I want to

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 16:55, stevea wrote: > On Nov 29, 2021, at 10:39 PM, Ewen Hill wrote: > > Indigenous nations/country > > I have a strong belief that we should allocate an entry around level > three to six for indigenous country. There will be discussion on fuzziness > of boundaries and

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

On Nov 29, 2021, at 10:39 PM, Ewen Hill wrote: > Indigenous nations/country > I have a strong belief that we should allocate an entry around level three to > six for indigenous country. There will be discussion on fuzziness of > boundaries and ownership, a number of these have been resolved

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

Hi all, A great discussion and can I thank Dian for raising this. *Postcodes* As well as SteveA's comments, postcode boundaries are proprietary and Auspost are never going to sign a waiver or have it as an open source service and no, I don't really understand this logic. The best you can get is

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

I will and do (cautiously, as an "outsider" from the USA, but as an "insider" being one who seriously coordinated the USA [1] getting our 4-10 admin_level table(s) [2] about as hammered-into-submission-and-consensus as is humanly OSM-possible, over months and years and sweat and tears) say one

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 at 09:29, Dian Ågesson wrote: > Suburbs and Localities in Australia are all using admin_level=10 > , > and some changes in early 2020 to the default map rendering (

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

> Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, thanks for all your work Dian > to change the “towns” back to suburbs. I downloaded a copy of the Victorian > place names data a little while ago for a GIS exercise and it was a real pain > to discover that an enormous number of purported towns

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

On 29/11/21 9:34 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Would villages / hamlets ie small country towns, also then be level 8? If so, that would help with the vast expanses of nothingness as villages don't get shown, despite them being the main (only!) centre for 00's of k's! Localities? Level

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

Would villages / hamlets ie small country towns, also then be level 8? If so, that would help with the vast expanses of nothingness as villages don't get shown, despite them being the main (only!) centre for 00's of k's! Thanks Graeme ___ Talk-au

[talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

Hello, I wanted to prompt a conversation about admin_level tagging in Australia and whether the current levels are appropriate. For context, I have been slowly changing suburbs in suburban Melbourne back from place=town to place=suburb following