I prefer
state=Queensland
state_code=QLD
country=Australia
country_code=AU
which I understand is consistent with
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:is_in
While there is scope for abbreviations in certain special identified
categories, the norm remains that names written in full. It seems
Thanks
I had missed that reference in the wiki re addr:country
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
ven within the LPI
datasets there may be data that we do not wish to use. This may also
be good reason that source tags for individual data items include not
just "LPI NSW" but indicate the particular dataset relied upon.
I am interested if anyone has other thoughts on these points.
I have approached the NSW Government and have received permission for
OpenStreetMap to use specified data from Land and Property Information
NSW.
I have added the appropriate attribution in the Contributors page of the
wiki under New South Wales Government data and it includes a link
("explicit
t; Nathanael Coyne www.purecaffeine.com[1]
> Canberra, Australia 0431 698 580
>
> On 6 December 2015 at 09:12, cleary <o...@97k.com> wrote:
>>
>>
I have approached the NSW Government and have received permission for
>>
OpenStreetMap to use specified data from Land
Motorways can sometimes have lower speed limits than some sections of
highways and some suburban streets can be divided roads so I find it
hard to use those criteria to determine if a road is a motorway. I think
we should be guided by the RMS. If they have given it an "M"
alphanumeric
Yes, Seems appropriate to revert these changes.
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016, at 06:48 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> On 24 June 2016 at 17:52, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Last Changeset: 40207793 looks to be removing the tag source=nearmap
>
> All their latest "FIX SOURCES" are like that and
That looks good, subject to being permitted to use the name of the stop.
Also need to add a source tag such as source=survey
In regard to name of stop, I’m not from Brisbane so I don’t know the
local practice. If the name of the stop is signposted at the stop then
it is OK to use it. However if
Australia to start with is likely not going to
> help a lot.
> Simon
> Am 25.06.2016 um 05:35 schrieb cleary:
>> I'm sorry that I'm slow in picking up an old thread from about six
>> months ago but I remain uncertain about the implications.
>>
>> As I understand the situ
I'm sorry that I'm slow in picking up an old thread from about six
months ago but I remain uncertain about the implications.
As I understand the situation, the licence that accompanies the GNAF
(address) data from data.gov.au is not itself adequate for OSM. However
the data it is covered by the
I have been adding administrative boundaries (some suburban boundaries,
Local Government Areas, State Forests and National Parks) using LPI NSW
data, including areas along state and territory borders. The NSW
boundaries as shown by LPI data are close but not exactly the same as
existing
In most cases I add a relation as there are often shared boundaries or
multiple parts to the conservation area. My most recent addition was
today. The tags I used for the relation were;
type=boundary
boundary=protected_area
protect_class=4
name=Livingstone State Conservation Area
source=LPI NSW
While undertaking various edits, I have notice multiple railway stations
with the words "Closed" or "Abandoned" or "Grain Only" as part of the
names.
I have changed some of these so that those words are removed from the
names and have added other tags to reflect the closed or abandoned
status.
Warin This is the part of NSW with which I am least familiar but I can't
work out what it is that is being mapped. I couldn't see any relation
between Bing imagery and the tracings in your polygon. If it is actually
the area above the tree-line, then I don't have a problem with it
although perhaps
Mark, I have also noticed this. In some cases, the LPI Map has an old
name that has been changed by the local shire council but it has not
been updated on the LPI Map. In some cases where there is a seriously
different name already in OSM, I found that seriously different name was
usually wrong
I think that "refreshing" the Geographic Names Board (GNB) placenames
would be unhelpful.
If you read the contributors page in the wiki, it is unclear that
appropriate permission was ever obtained to use the GNB data. It seemed
to me that the particular contributor was relying on a generalised
Nev
I have added some of those boundaries. Where the administrative boundary
and the national park boundary share exactly the same way, I have used
that single way and included it in two separate relations, one for the
administrative area and the other for the national park. If the admin
a further thought, I am a little averse to using post offices as a
guide. While would have been useful in the past, they are being closed
and merged at a rapid rate and may almost disappear in the future.
Do my thoughts help at all?
On Sat, May 14, 2016, at 02:30 PM, Warin wrote:
> On
I agree that there is a need to improve our classification of places.
However I think that taking population as the sole criterion will create
more discrepancies than we have already.
For example, I live in a Sydney suburb that has a population greater
than the gazetted "state suburb" of
>From what you have written, I think you are probably right to change
classificaiton of Quobba Station to village rather than town.
In regard to smaller rural centres, I have also been wondering about
classifications. In South Australia, some rural properties constitute
their own official
Recently I updated some information in OSM using data from South
Australian Suburb Boundaries and Conservation Reserve Boundaries but I
had inadvertently failed to note that the recent data was provided under
a CC-BY-4.0 licence that was not covered by the explicit permission we
had been granted
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I have noticed there are two relations with similar areas and both
> tagged landuse=forest. Relation 5929494 created by down12under
> changeset 37053382 2/7/16 source given as 'aerial imagery', later
> edited by cleary and TheSwavu.
>
> Relation 592
There was a similar recent issue for which the errant code had been
reverted. But apparently the reverted code has not yet been rolled out
to servers. I presume this will happen soon and should then be OK.
Thanks to those who offered suggestions.
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016, at 05:14 PM, cleary
I have noticed errors in rendering names of administrative boundaries on
the OSM website map. It is not just Australian boundaries. For example
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/48.99957/-110.00728shows Canada
and United States on the reverse sides of their shared boundary.
I had
, 2016, at 07:45 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
> Is the problem CC 4.0 or is it the riders that have been added? I'm just
> wondering if this is a general problem with the other data sets on
> data.gov.au.
>
> On 10/07/16 14:06, cleary wrote:
> > Feedback from the legal-talk l
icence.
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> Am 11.07.2016 um 11:45 schrieb Andrew Davidson:
> > Is the problem CC 4.0 or is it the riders that have been added? I'm
> > just wondering if this is a general problem with the other data sets
> > on data.gov.au.
> >
> >
I have been looking at some South Australian administrative boundaries.
The South Australia / Western Australia border is a bit messy and I was
looking to see it I could sort it out. I realised that some of the data
is part of the recently reported illegal imports of WA data - includes
some LGA
I don't have the knowledge to run scripts safely, so it would be good if
you could do this. Thanks.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016, at 09:34 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>
> On 5 Jul 2016 8:26 PM, "cleary" <o...@97k.com> wrote:
> > I have been looking at some Sou
lines from the Contributors page
of the wiki?
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 11:15 AM, cleary wrote:
>
> The issue of using the Australian PSMA Administrative Boundaries in OSM
> was discussed in both talk-au and legal-talk lists. Subsequently I
> submitted a request to the Spatial Unit
Reuben. Thanks for your response and clarification. Hopefully your
request to Queensland Government Department will be fruitful.
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016, at 04:18 PM, Reuben wrote:
>
> On 10/07/16 14:06, cleary wrote:
> > Feedback from the legal-talk list is that the reply from th
t in a not insignificant
> level of PITA. Which is why I was hoping to avoid this in the future.
>
> On 10/7/16 16:18, Reuben wrote:
> >
> > On 10/07/16 14:06, cleary wrote:
> >> Feedback from the legal-talk list is that the reply from the Department
> >> o
s rights to use the material and does not impact
OpenStreetMap's licence.
I trust this information has been of assistance.
Kind regards,
Spatial Policy team
-Original Message-
From: cleary [mailto:o...@97k.com]
Sent: Thursday, 30 June 2016 6:08 PM
To: Spatial
Subject: Permission f
NSW ones is that bringing them in
> manually is a massive PITA.
>
> On 26/06/16 10:11, cleary wrote:
> > Thanks to Simon and Andrew for your responses which I now understand.
> > Can I now follow-on and request clarification about other data from
> > data.gov.au - for ex
It's good to get access to that additional data and will improve the
map.
I would prefer incremental additions, that is one-by-one, after checking
what is already on the map.
My major concern with any mass import is the effect on existing data. In
particular where a new way is overlaid on an
Use your favourite search engine to search for the many articles about
copyright in the yellow and white pages. You will find articles such as
http://www.mondaq.com/australia/x/95894/Copyright/Copyright+in+Databases+No+Copyright+in+White+and+Yellow+Pages
The Federal Court of Australia ruled
I have been adding administrative boundaries in NSW and SA using the
Government data for which OSM has been given explicit permission. I am
currently working on the "Pastoral Unincorporated Area" in SA and
another mapper commented that it was inappropriate. I responded but my
response appears not
t;.
On Sat, Dec 24, 2016, at 05:38 PM, Warin wrote:
> On 24-Dec-16 04:40 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
>> On 23/12/16 09:50, cleary wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I suggest a simple one-word change in the wiki so that Level 6
>>>
I have a different view about whether the unincorporated areas actually
exist. They have defined boundaries and names, both assigned by the
respective State governments, and included in the LGA datasets. I have
seen the boundaries signposted when travelling in rural areas of both
NSW and SA and
undary has "administrative counties
> / Unitary authorities[1], City of London"
>
> And the wiki on Unitary authorities[2] says in part "type of local
> authority that has a single tier and is responsible for all local
> government[3] functions within its area&
A few months ago, I wrote to the Department of Prime Minister and
Cabinet seeking access to datasets published by data.gov.au including
the PSMA Administrative Boundaries. The response was that "due to the
large number of datasets on data.gov.au and, in some instances,
obligations on the
The United States federal government model is recommended for adoption
by Australian Commonwealth, State and Territory governments so that all
published government data is entirely in the public domain and is
offered free and without restriction.
_____
Your approach looks good to me.
In regard to tags : I understand that the intent of the IUCN categories
is that class I areas are generally reserved for scientific and research
purposes or very limited visitation by non-scientific personnel.
However, in some places including South Australia, some
OSM Inspector is useful but sometimes it shows errors where none exist.
I think some "errors" might be better left alone. OSM Inspector is great
but it is not perfect. But it is good that you have looked carefully at
the "errors" in case there were problems to be rectified.
On Fri, Apr 14,
I draw a parallel with other amenities. Some cafes are licensed to sell
limited alcohol but that does not make them pubs; and some pubs serve
coffee but that does not make them cafes. And both cafes and pubs
often serve food. While there can be overlap in services provided by
amenities, map
That's good to get the copyright issue fixed.
However, as I noted in a previous post, I have reservations about GNB
data. Co-ordinates are often incorrect, sometimes by kilometres (even
showing a couple of NSW locations as being across state border in
Victoria) whereas the NSW LPI Map seems to
agreement that this is an appropriate tag
to be added to nature protected areas, then I would be happy to use it
that way.
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017, at 12:29 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
>
>
> On 07/12/17 10:54, cleary wrote:
> > Protected areas will be rendered on the map if the tag
> > &q
There are long-standing problems in relation to the rendering of
protected areas in OpenStreetMap. This is not surprising as there many
protection classes (there is provision for up to 99) including
nature-protected, resources-protected and social-protected areas.
Presumably various types of
I agree with most of what Andrew says. However I offer a couple
of comments:
1. In regard to PSMA Admin Boundaries, it is my understanding that PSMA
cannot grant a licence waiver as it is not the copyright holder.
PSMA has been licensed to use the data under a CC licence. However,
as
be very happy if you can get a waiver signed.
On Sat, Apr 28, 2018, at 9:25 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> On 28 April 2018 at 21:08, cleary <o...@97k.com> wrote:
>> __
>> ... PSMA has been licensed to use the data under a CC licence...
>
> Are you sure? Honest questi
I am struggling with how to use "ephemeral" rather than the "intermittent" tag,
particularly when it comes to on-the-ground verification.
I have travelled in some rural and outback areas in western NSW and Queensland
and, to a lesser extent, in South Australia. I also regularly look at
Where there is conflicting information, it is good to go back to
sources. In this instance, it might be prudent to contact the mapper
and ask for the source of the data for this edit.
Currently, this particular contribution appears to have no disclosed
source. In such a case (and unless the
I agree that it would be useful to map deserts. The boundaries may be inexact
and landcover is quite variable but they are geographic regions that users may
occasionally search for, and they are major features of inland Australia.
However I don't yet know of a source we could use.
On Wed,
I am no expert on mapping lanes and I defer to those with better
knowledge. However common sense suggests to me that vehicles are able to
move between lanes, whether into other lanes for vehicles travelling in
the same direction or overtaking in a lane normally used for traffic in
the oppisite
I think it is worthwhile to correct any errors/discrepancies and agree they
will probably need to be done on a place-by-place basis.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Permission to include the PSMA Boundaries in OSM is great news.
In regard to questions and comments from other mappers:
- I find the current boundaries in NSW and SA to be useful i.e. include
LGA and suburb/locality. However, electoral boundaries including
local government wards seem very
I've already communicated separately but reiterated here for the list:
As CAPAD is permitted source of data, we should reproduce this data,
including names, as it appears in the source. Of course, if we have
multiple permitted sources with differing data, then we may need to
ascertain which is
In New South Wales, the Geographic Names Board register shows the Sydney
suburb Mount Druitt (no abbreviation) while the adjacent suburb is St
Marys (always St and never Saint). The same applies to places named St
Peters and St Leonards. Using the word "Saint" would not accord with the
places'
A month ago, we celebrated the news that OSM now has approval to use the
PSMA Administrative Boundaries and there was some discussion, including
the need for a proper import process. I am willing to start adding some
boundaries in areas with which I am familiar/interested but I am waiting
for
It is my understanding that copyright exists whether or not there is a
copyright notice on a document/item. Unless someone with more legal
knowledge has better information, I would say that copying is not
permitted unless we go through the usual permisison process.
On Fri, Oct 5, 2018, at
In regard to administrative boundaries being attached to other features such as
waterways and roads, I think it is a trade-off between accuracy and
convenience.
I am most familiar with NSW. Boundaries are not "defined" by words but rather
by surveyors' charts. The surveyors may often have
In regard to admin boundaries sharing the coastline, I think that would also be
incorrect but I am less confident of my view on this.
I did update some administrative boundaries in South Australia using the SA
Government Data and those boundaries did not coincide with the coastline (see
the
I'll look there. Thanks.
On Sun, Oct 7, 2018, at 12:31 PM, Warin wrote:
> On 07/10/18 11:22, cleary wrote:
> >
> > In regard to admin boundaries sharing the coastline, I think that would
> > also be incorrect but I am less confident of my view on this.
> >
> >
As a regular user of public transport, I agree.
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019, at 4:39 PM, Warin wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> At present the names of bus stops goes something like
>
> name=Strathfield Station, Albert Rd (Stand F).
>
>
> The web transport trip planers direct you to Stand F, yet this is not
>
In Sydney, many stops display the stop number but I'm not sure if we have
another source for this data - in NSW, the convention is that the first four
numbers are the postcode of the suburb. So all stops in Strathfield would have
a 6 or 7 digit number with the first four digits being the
ype=boundary or type=multipolygon?
>
> 5. Import Process
> Open https://tianjara.net/data/osm/imports/sa-aquatic-reserves.osm in
> JOSM and upload
> - done using dedicated import account
> - changeset source tag pointing to
> https://data.sa.gov.au/data/dataset/aquatic-reserves
&g
Agree completely
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018, at 10:02 AM, Warin wrote:
> Hi,
> I have made a rough entry for Goyder's Lagoon - South Aust. above Lake
> Eyre - about thesame size.
> The boundary is rough because, as you would expect, the rain fall
> determines where it is and that varies from fall to
I'm not sure that the changes to OSM Carto will solve this issue as I think
only a few protect classes have been affected - but perhaps it is worth trying.
I would like to see boundaries for a different reason - where two state forests
are adjacent, the boundary between the two is not visible.
On any map, more detail is generally preferred to less detail, provided that
the information is useful.
I use Central reasonably often. There were 25 platforms (a couple now closed
for new construction) and platform 1 is a fair way from platform 25. I think
most users would benefit from having
Appears to be good process. I support it.
On Mon, 18 Mar 2019, at 6:54 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Old style wikipedia link is one where language is stored in key, not in
> value.
>
> For example "wikipedia:en=Australia" is an old style link, while
> "wikipedia=en:Australia" is a form that
This makes good sense to me.
On Sun, 17 Feb 2019, at 11:54 PM, Joel H. wrote:
> Linking roads should (generally speaking) never have names, an update to the
> ID editor now displays Destination instead of name for input. My suggestion
> would be to change the Offramp prefixes to:
>
I think the current tagging is an accurate portrayal of what is "on the
ground". Looking at imagery and, if one visited the place in person, I think
there is a wider section with a roundabout which seems appropriately tagged as
residential. Although it is possible to drive along the narrower
I have great respect for Andrew Harvey's mapping and I would generally defer to
his views. However in this instance, I would say that I have found it generally
useful if the source of information is included with individual items, whether
trees, roads, waterways, buildings etc to assist any
Thanks to everyone for the feedback and suggesstions. I will try to
incorporate some of the suggestions in changes I make.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
In the past, I added some parts of the Gwydir River to the map using the NSW
LPI Base Map because I could not see a clear waterway on satellite imagery.
Since then, I have visited the area twice and cannot actually find a river
where it is shown on the map. Much of the "river" is in private
I have mapped such areas intended for water storage as "landuse=reservoir". I
don't think reservoirs need to be over a natural watercourse. Any water storage
area is a reservoir.
On Wed, 1 May 2019, at 12:32 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Question that just came to mind after discussions
I do not reside in Queensland but I visit parts of the state regularly and
collect information which I can add to OSM.
In recent times a proliferation of unnamed roads has appeared on the map with
edits usually titled "Missing Roads in Queensland" or similar. I have
communicated with a couple
I would like to confirm that the inclusion of qualifiers such as "closed" or
"freight only" in the name is NOT appropriate.
e.g.
railway=station
name = xx (closed)
or
railway=station
name=xxx (freight only)
I understand both are inappropriate uses of the name tag and should not be
Where is uses OSM now but I think that is a fairly recent development.
Previously their map was from another source, possibly Here Maps but I'm not
sure. Use of that data in OSM would not have been appropriate. The fact that
something was not yet in OSM is evidence that OSM was not the source
I understand the intent but I disagree.
I have a special interest in administrative boundaries and their implications
etc. As far as I am aware, Norfolk Island is still a territory of Australia.
It is now part of Australia but is not part of any state. Three other
territories in this
Supported. Well done.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2019, at 11:55 AM, Warin wrote:
> Ok.. I think the following can be done on the Australian Tagging Guidelines;
>
>
> Remove the words "not map the interior private roads in detail" from
> service roads
>
Some Sydney bus routes have changed and I have modified a few by survey
(catching buses and recording routes and stops). Using TfNSW data would be
much easier.
1. Can I use the TfNSW data now to modify/add some local bus routes or do we
need to await discussion and an agreed import plan?
2.
, I will leave it to others, with more knowledge and skills,
to progress use of this data when time permits.
Thanks again for the feedback and offer of assistance.
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020, at 11:32 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 10:09, cleary wrote:
> >
&
I suspect this might be a mapping competence problem or possibly a problem
with the editing tool rather than intent to add incorrect information. It
appears to me that the intent might have been to map the area as a wood but it
has been mapped also as swamp (from the nearby relation).
I once
I agree with your concern. Some imagery may permit an experienced eye to
identify a fence line. However identification of a particular fence by name
would need more than the satellite imagery. If the source of other info
including name is copyrighted, then it's inclusion in OSM is not
Yes. This seems right.
On Fri, 3 Jan 2020, at 10:06 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> I've updated the Australian Tagging Guidelines with NSW fire station
> operators
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Fire_Stations.
>
> I'm proposing:
>
> for NSW Rural Fire
The Jervis Bay Territory/NSW boundary is shown such that Jervis Bay Territory
overlaps into parts of Shoalhaven Council area and NSW suburbs. Obviously not
correct. There seems to be no source provided for the location of the boundary,
although much of it appears to be attached to the
I agree with Warin's comments.
Some years ago someone did a mass import from a public-domain website with
"airport" information. Personally I think of an airport as a location which is
accessible to the public and which offers regular commercial flights. Most of
the "airports" shown in
If you just delete the tag, someone might interpret it as an accidental
deletion. A changed tag is clearly a deliberate decision based on new
information.
On Sun, 29 Dec 2019, at 8:52 AM, Bob Cameron wrote:
> Hi
>
> The tagging guidelines don't quite seem to over this. I'd like to do it
Sorry I'm a little slow to respond to this question. I have been thinking about
it. particularly in the context of a similar property that I mapped a few years
ago. I had previously tagged it as a social_facility but that is not correct.
Upon reflection, I have changed the tags for
In regard to mapping reservoirs without water:
In rural areas, I have mapped some reservoirs with "intermittent=yes" where
that is appropriate. While they are correctly mapped as reservoirs, it is
probably helpful to show that there is not always water in them. If some
imagery shows water and
Generally "place=locality" is appropriate for named places that are unpopulated.
(See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place}
On Mon, 13 Apr 2020, at 2:56 AM, Little Maps wrote:
> Hi again everyone, hope you’re all enjoying Easter. A simple newbie
> question...
>
> How do you label
And I should have added, that it is usually just a node unless you have
specified boundaries..
On Mon, 13 Apr 2020, at 2:56 AM, Little Maps wrote:
> Hi again everyone, hope you’re all enjoying Easter. A simple newbie
> question...
>
> How do you label localities that have no precise
Hi Ian
Welcome to mapping in OSM.
The Murray River area, with state border, local government boundaries, national
park boundaries, etc as well as gradually changing river course and wetlands
etc is probably one of the most complex areas of the OSM map. While your
enthusiasm is appreciated,
Unless the road has a different name (and I think that would be rare) I agree
that the road name is the tunnel name.
In my experience, signs show the tunnel name without any other road name.
Where there are differences of opinion, I think local knowledge is always to be
preferred.
On
I think the air force base and civilian airport share the same runway but they
are two distinct entities with separate buildings etc. Same applies in some
other cities including Canberra. I would defer to someone more knowledgeable
but I think it remains appropriate to have two separate
> day or two, with a ’Wetland’ overlay in most areas to show its
> seasonally flooded. In practice there won’t be any great precision to
> the wetland overlay as it’s such a mosaic.
>
> Thanks again for everyone’s great feedback. Best wishes Ian
>
>
> > On 12 May 2020
I have visited Millewa in NSW and I've seen a little of Barmah but not much. I
have a 4WD vehicle but I would not have left the road in either place as I
would have become seriously bogged. It was quite wet in both places when I
visited (some years apart, not at the same time). I think they
One further consideration is that NSW LPI BaseMap shows most of the NSW side of
this area as wetland, subject to periodic inundation, while only small areas
are shown as swamp. At the moment, OSM shows most of it as swamp while the
named swamps are shown as wetland - exactly the opposite of
The term "hospital" is subject to a lot of interpretation and is an emotionally
laden issue in many rural communities.
Many of the "hospitals" mapped in NSW rural areas (and presumably in other
states) do not satisfy the OSM definition of "hospital" and some would not
satisfy the definition
I looked at the Wiki. It is quite a while since I looked at the section on
administrative boundaries. My recollection is that it used to have LGA as
admin_level=6 and suburb as level 9 or 10. I do not recall any discussion of
inclusion of regions, districts and townsites nor any previous
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
