On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 23:51:35 +1100 [email protected] wrote: > Hi all, > > It's really nice to see suburb boundaries popping up around the > place, it just makes the map look that little bit more professional.
Yeah it is isn't it, Franc has done some nice work. > There seems to be some naming redundancy in the NSW data though. The > previous nswgnb import (before my time, don't know the source or > history of this) placed suburb names all around the place, and now > the ABS suburb import is repeating the data. An example of this is > here: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-32.96227&lon=151.65078&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF > > What are people's thoughts about this? Should the data be sanity > checked for naming consistency then the nswgnb node deleted? Or > should it be kept incase some renderer doesn't understand the suburb > relation? Like perhaps it would be easier for the mkgmap devs to keep > the nodes rather than have them write code to make a node from the > relation. You've hit an interesting point here, one I've thought about a few times without coming to any reasonable answer myself. On the one hand we have the case where we leave around we're making allowances for any program that for whatever reason doesn't support 100% of the OSM data structures. On the other we're having multiple version of the same data which have to some how be kept consistent creating more maintenance of the data. After many years working with a number of databases I've found every un-necessary duplication of data leads to headaches, but there's inevitably going to be software that gets out of date and people are going to expect the data to change for it rather than update the software :/ I think what the boundaries need (and this is where a spot where it being a relation comes in handy) is a way to make a centre node, if the centre node is there then it can be assume it will display the name of the boundary, otherwise the renders should display their own boundary. This proposed option seems to be close to that kind of thing: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/add_center_in_Relation:boundary Of course then we'd have to get the renderers to recognize that fact on not render a centre text for a multipolygon with a 'centre' (unless they already do that?) (This has the benefit of moving the name display to a place more appropriate for the suburb rather than the exact centre of the area, I'm sure we can all thing of suburbs where the demographic centre isn't the physical centre) -- =b _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
