I think you are on the right track, Andrew. Australian Bureau of Statistics
(ABS) is a credible and independent statistical authority that we are lucky to
have in this country. I would be confident of their data and analyses. Their
Urban Centres and Localities (UCLs) looks suitable for our
.
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023, at 6:20 AM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
> On 5/10/23 18:01, cleary wrote:
>> the small central district? Or is it the much larger Tamworth LGA? I
>> think it would include the suburbs but not the outlying
>> towns/villages in the LGA. There are also city/suburbs suc
It seems to me that the presence and types of services correlate reasonably
closely with population, which is a verifiable number.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) statistical boundaries approximate but
are not exactly the same as state government suburb/locality boundaries but are
I agree that population is not necessarily the only factor but, in practice,
population correlates closely with the services and facilities available in a
location which is effectively the "relative importance", isn't it?
I presume you are considering putting bigger dots and bigger writing on
I agree with your proposed action to separate the lake from the remainder of
the river. Related to this is the question of whether riverbanks should be
named. I would name a waterway and its relation but not a riverbank
multipolygon. I would have thought that a search for "Murray River" would
I agree with much of what you wrote, but not all. Your final sentence implies
that you think that where OSM and the DCS NSW Base Map are different, then the
latter must be correct and OSM wrong. I have been frustrated when I have
visited locations and mapped features such as road names or road
Apologies for a couple of errors in my previous posts:
1. DCS is acronym for Department of Customer Services (not Community Services)
2. reference to national park boundary was for Wadbilliga National Park (not
Wadbilla)
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023, at 12:14 PM, cleary wrote:
>> I'm not neces
> I'm not necessarily disputing this, but there are so many anecdotes and
> opinions being expressed on this topic. Could I ask if we have any
> source or citation for this? I mean the Department of Community
> Services doesn't even exist any longer, and doesn't sound like it
> should have
My knowledge is limited to NSW as that is the state in which I have previously
made enquiries. Verbal descriptions of administrative boundaries have not been
used in recent years. Boundaries are now defined geospatially, with the NSW
Department of Community Services being responsible for
I have previously suggested in several posts that we should not rely on the NSW
Base Map if there is another source of information, primarily because outdated
information is often not updated in the Base Map.
However, in this instance, I think the Base Map shows the correct name.
When OSM was
Survey is the most reliable source. Thanks for doing it.
On Sun, 5 Mar 2023, at 10:35 PM, Mark Pulley wrote:
> I’ve just uploaded my edits from yesterday’s Bridle Track trip. I got
> as far as Monaghans Bluff in my 2WD. I then walked the old road, then
> returned to my car via the new road.
I am not familiar with the use of heatmaps for mapping but, if it involves
adding non-officlal trails, then I consider it potentially dangerous and not
suitable for OSM.
I have a strong view that mappers and publishers of maps have a public safety
responsibility. There should be nothing
The name should not constrain the classification of the highway (e.g. Dowling
Track, Ooodnadatta Track). And, as I've commented previously in other threads,
the DCS NSW Base Map can be quite outdated.
However, a quick look at a YouTube video suggests that the Bridle Track should
still be
In principle, I agree with Warin. My problem is relying on the Base Map as an
authoritative source for names when there is other information.
I just looked at Lane Cove Fire Station which has been recently re-tagged. It
looks good to me.
___
Talk-au
but it has never been
changed on the Base Map . That is the most obsolete item that I have identified
but it is a reminder that names on the Base Map are not necessarily current.
On Sun, 12 Feb 2023, at 8:54 AM, cleary wrote:
> The DCS NSW Base Map is a great resource but some aspects do not s
The DCS NSW Base Map is a great resource but some aspects do not seem to get
updated e.g. roads that were once public but are now private may still appear
on the map to have former status (e.g. parts of unincorporated area in western
NSW), re-named roads may still show old names, waterways show
I presume that a single closed way for an area would work - I think I might
have done it somewhere but I don't recall where. The Hiawatha precinct was
memorable because of its unusual name.
On Tue, 17 May 2022, at 2:44 PM, Little Maps wrote:
> Thanks Cleary, that’s an interesting appro
I had looked at this a few years ago. I edited one area , making it part of two
relations :
South West Woodland Nature Reserve (relation 5825677)
South West Woodland Nature Reserve - Hiawatha Precinct (relation 7477098)
The first relation includes all twenty or more areas that comprise the
In regard to second link which refers to a private road on Crown land :
Crown land is not the same as public land. There are many areas of
government-owned land that are closed to the public. The land may be reserved
or dedicated for particular purposes that are best served by exclusion of
mapped.
On Sat, 5 Mar 2022, at 8:46 AM, Dian Ågesson wrote:
> Hi Cleary,
>
> Two points:
>
> Paint isn’t a barrier. Vehicles can, and do, traverse over paint; it’s
> legal in many cases if there is a road blockage, for example. Being
> unable to change lanes doesn
Paint is physical. It can be seen. It is not just a psychological or imaginary
concept. If one is driving a motor vehicle and abiding by the law then, in my
understanding, an unbroken painted line on the road is a physical barrier that
cannot be traversed.
On Fri, 4 Mar 2022, at 10:55 PM,
I am not familiar with particular intersections and my mapping of urban
intersections is limited. However I just looked at satellite imagery for three
of the identified intersections and the current mapping seems to be an accurate
reflection of what is on the ground. While guidelines can be
Perhaps others have different perceptions but the driver reviver places I've
seen in NSW operated only for limited hours on certain days such as until
mid-afternoon on weekends and public holidays. I was so disappointed that I
have not stopped at one for a while. I do not recall any food
ing4fe-2injKcg-2injK9W-2inizAP-2ing4dR-85TtMN-2m6cARv-TMAatS
On Mon, 21 Feb 2022, at 8:53 PM, Warin wrote:
> On 21/2/22 19:51, cleary wrote:
>> I too have struggled with correct tagging. I live in the city but I have
>> enjoyed visiting western NSW and I have an interest in the wat
I too have struggled with correct tagging. I live in the city but I have
enjoyed visiting western NSW and I have an interest in the waterways of the
Murray-Darling river system. I have seen areas temporarily flooded on some
occasions and the same areas dust-dry at other times. I think I am
It occurs to me that access is a differentiating feature. "Living streets" seem
to be open to the public whereas the parking aisle in front of Bunnings or
shared driveway of a block of units would (I think) be access=customers or
access=private.
I agree with your view. And perhaps applicable
I think it is still usual practice to have a label node as part of the relation
for the boundaries of each suburb. Ideally this label node is placed at the
business or residential centre of the area even if it is not the geographical
centre. For example see Hillgrove NSW (near Armidale)
I have used highway=construction where road was completely closed for a year or
so. I also added a note about the the reason and anticipated duration.
In such situations, sometimes sections of road near the closed section might
remain open for restricted access by residents. If you are aware
I suggest leaving the bus stop ID number in the format that Andrew initially
stated, ref=20 (rather than ref:stand=A)
As a regular used of buses (pre-covid), I think "Stand A" etc needs to be part
of the name. At some locations, the stands are a block or more apart (such as
the multiple
Statement on Council website is : "This website and all content is copyright ©
Toowoomba Regional Council 2015. Material may be used for private purposes, but
not reproduced without the permission of the Toowoomba Regional Council.
Changes are periodically made to the information contained
I do not support adding variants to the standard alphabet.
The English language has, for many generations, incorporated words from other
languages but used the standard alphabet to represent the sounds of those
words. The word "cafe" had a mark over the final letter in the original French
Sorry. I should have written ...add the place node to the relation and
its role would be "label".
On Fri, 5 Nov 2021, at 5:53 PM, cleary wrote:
> Ideally suburbs would have a relation for the boundary PLUS a node for
> the "label node" as part of the relat
Ideally suburbs would have a relation for the boundary PLUS a node for the
"label node" as part of the relation. I'm not so familiar with Victorian
locations, but this example for South Albury in NSW is an example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5901488
Where there is a boundary and
Good mapping practice is to keep administrative boundaries such as state parks,
conservation areas, suburbs etc separate from natural features such as water,
waterways, woods etc. While they sometimes approximate, they rarely coincide
exactly.
Tagging a state park as natural=wood is
I say suburb. If it is within a city or city metropolis, I'd say it's a
suburb.
Further, I'd say the mapper who changed the tag for Keilor Downs with the
explanation "Changing place=suburb to place=town so that streets can be found
in map in next map release" is seriously wrong.
A town
for your diligence in following up this issue
Michael Cleary
On Mon, 12 Jul 2021, at 11:07 PM, Nemanja Bracko (E-Search) via Talk-au wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I know it might be a vacation period for most people, but if you are
> still online, we would like to know which method is
t; - Phil, Daniel and Seb would prefer the suburb and postcode on each
> address object.
> - Andrew Davidson and cleary would prefer we not include suburb and
> postcode on each address object and instead require data consumers to
> derive this data from the existing boundaries, an
I think I recall discussion some months ago about incorrect suburbs being
assigned addresses in Nominatim when relying on suburb boundaries. I think I
recall that most errors occurred near the boundaries rather than the centre of
areas, and more often when the suburb has an irregular shape
I'd say that we map what we can confirm "on the ground". The inclusion of
non-existent features in OSM is of no help to anyone. In rural areas, there
are whole villages in which plans were approved and gazetted but never
constructed or, having once existed, have disappeared as the population
I was told that the correct tag for places such as towns or suburbs is
postal_code=* whereas the addr:postcode tag is for individual locations.
However, even with that tag on the suburb boundary, Nominatim is getting it
wrong, particularly for streets close to suburb boundaries. I found
Thanks for that info.
On Sat, 28 Nov 2020, at 11:15 AM, Mark Pulley wrote:
> There is flood_prone=yes that can be used for these roads - but only
> where signposted.
>
> Mark P.
>
> > On 27 Nov 2020, at 8:19 pm, cleary wrote:
> >
> > In regard to
I agree with tagging any section of road with speed limits or weight limits
where applicable. I have been driving on Australian roads for many years and,
while I have seen bridges or sections of roads signposted as being subject to
speed or weight limits, I do not recall ever seeing a few
I agree with Andrew Harvey's comments. Thanks to Aleksandar for raising this
issue which has also vexed me.
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, at 7:52 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 at 00:04, Aleksandar Matejevic (E-Search) via
> Talk-au wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I have noticed that
When I have added bus stop names in the past, using signposts or local
knowledge, I have avoided abbreviations as I have understood that to be usual
OSM practice. I am familiar with abbreviations so I am comfortable with them,
especially "St" instead of "Street" and "Dr" instead of "Drive".
Yes, I and others have used ref=* and it seems OK. Example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6763249794 However I have also seen
others use local_ref=* as at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2877506734
I'm not sure that there is any purpose to "local_ref" unless it is somehow
I usually tag such roads in rural areas as highway=unclassified.
I would use highway=residential for towns, suburbs or outer-suburban areas with
residential housing or large housing blocks up to about 2 hectares - where the
landuse is primarily residential or other urban use such as
This morning I was looking on the map for an unfamiliar location in Queensland.
Not only did I find the place I was looking for but I was pleasantly surprised
to find administrative boundaries showing for suburbs/localities and Local
Government Areas in Queensland.
I know it has been a lot
In regard to ABS data ... I understand that it was added into OSM when it was
the only data for which we could get permission. ABS statistical areas
approximate suburb boundaries (perhaps 90% similarity). In the Sydney suburb
where I live, the ABS boundary is almost exactly the suburb
Thanks to both Andrew Davidson and Andrew Harvey for their work as I see
addition of PSMA administrative boundaries as an important improvement for our
map.
In regard to adding source tags to objects, I find them very helpful when
editing something. If I think I have contrary information, I
I reside in a NSW suburb/locality which was initially given a British name by
the early British settlers but very soon they adopted the name used by the
local indigenous occupants. My home address continues to have the name used by
the original inhabitants.
Some other places and and landmarks
t; way & that these type of facilities should stay as hospitals.
> >
> >> Further more, should it be defined as "an official hospital or the first
> >> place of medical support in a rural setting"?
> >
> > You're probably correct but I thi
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 agree with reverting the changes in the wiki in regard to Administrative
Boundaries.
Mike King's comments supporting boundaries for (1) country, (2) state, (3) LGA
and (4) suburb are consistent with general usage in the wider community and
with previous usage in OSM.
There are other
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
This issue was raised on this list some time ago, perhaps four or five years,
maybe more. I am one of the mappers who has added "leisure=nature reserve" to
many protected areas since that time. While tagging for the renderer is
generally discouraged, a map without protected areas was
Thanks for the interest in mapping in Australia and thanks for posting your
plans on this list.
I would add to the caution expressed by others. I live in an urban location in
Australia but I have travelled in other areas within Australia. It has taken
me quite some time to learn to
Hi Sebastian.
I don't think we have permission to use information from
https://transportnsw.info so we would need other sources in order to add this
information in OSM.
However I am not sure that this information is necessary. Over a few years, I
have added some bus stops and bus routes
I agree with Warin.
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020, at 12:58 AM, Warin wrote:
> On 18/6/20 6:48 pm, Little Maps wrote:
> > Many thanks Warin, that seems much more variable in Vic, esp in Gippsland
> > where natural=wood is a common tag for areas tagged as State Forests.
> > Plantations in SW Vic are quite
> 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
, 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:
> >
&
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 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
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
>
Sorry. On reflection, I think I misunderstood your proposal.
I think your suggestion is consistent with the capital of a territory.
Apology for mis-reading proposal.
On Sun, 6 Oct 2019, at 2:53 PM, Joachim wrote:
> Hello Aussie mappers,
>
> a quick heads-up that i plan to change the capital
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
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 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
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'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.
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
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
>
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
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
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.
> >
> >
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
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
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
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
1 - 100 di 166 matches
Mail list logo
