+1 Kevin again :) Boundaries are a MUST if ever you want better geocoding.
We just need to deconflict the boundaries that are different from StatsCan & the local municipalities (these boundaries should be "authoritative" if they exist). Remember, not all townships have a full GIS team working for them, there's going to be many areas in Canada that StatsCan does have the "best" data. *~~~~~~* *Denis Carriere* *GIS Software & Systems Specialist* On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:38 PM, kevinfarrugia <kevinfarru...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry JP, just talking from my experience in Ontario where they generally > (at least in Southern Ontario) follow legal boundaries. > > In the end, whoever does it will need to have knowledge of the area and > how boundaries work in that province/locality, but boundaries are > definitely important for geocoding and analysis and would remove the need > for extremely redundant addr tags that are used for cities. > > > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. > > -------- Original message -------- > From: "J.P. Kirby" <webmas...@the506.com> > Date: 2017-03-07 1:21 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: James <james2...@gmail.com> > Cc: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Municipal boundaries > > And even then, not all CSDs are municipalities. In Nova Scotia for > instance they have "county subdivisions" which have no legal standing at > all and are just StatsCan creations. > > I'd suggest boundaries of actual municipalities are worthy of being added > into OSM, but not all CSDs fit that bill. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Mar 7, 2017, at 2:10 PM, James <james2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > CSDs are suppose to represent city/town limits (observable as usually > there's a sign that says Welcome to X or Sorry to see you leave X), but > they have been rounded off to look nice and may not reflect what it is in > reality > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 2017-03-07 10:36 AM, Bjenk Ellefsen wrote: >> > >> > … Any more thoughts? >> >> If you're planning to import/add abstract statistical boundaries, rather >> than those defined by municipal boundaries, then I'd suggest that they >> don't belong in OSM. >> >> “Contributions to OpenStreetmap should be: >> 1. Truthful - means that you cannot contribute something you have >> invented. >> 2. Legal - means that you don't copy copyrighted data without >> permission. >> 3. Verifiable - means that others can go there and see for >> themselves if your data is correct. >> 4. Relevant - means that you have to use tags that make clear to >> others how to re-use the data >> >> When in doubt, also consider the "on the ground rule": map the world >> as it can be observed by someone physically there.” >> >> — How We Map <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map> >> >> Unless CSDs are physically observable, they are too abstract for OSM. >> >> Stewart > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
