I personally want them kept. Now that we have bing imagery covering more areas, there is less reliance on using them for getting other data (creeks and roads) out of the boundaries. When we imported the boundaries, all we had was crappy yahoo and GPS traces. I think users know to not touch them now unless they know a suburb boundary has moved in reality. It also means we don't have to use the http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:is_in tag for roads and POI's as the boundaries automatically give the features a suburb/town location, which is useful for sites like Open MapQuest and GPS apps like Skobbler and Navfree.
On 03/12/2011, at 10:47 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Ben Kelley <[email protected]> wrote: >> What will get removed? The relations? The ways? The points? I guess this is >> a question bigger than just the ABS data, but given how integrated this >> import is with other data, the impact would be significant. >> >> How on earth would we plan for such removal? >> >> Franc also imported postcode boundaries at the same time as the suburb >> boundaries. > > To play Devil's Advocate here, does anyone actually want the suburb > boundaries retained (or reimported)? To me, they've always been a big > pain in the arse - they get in the way when you're trying to map, they > show up in various renderings and add noise, they show up on my GPS > and can be mistaken for roads. And they really don't add a lot of > value - a suburb centrepoint would be just as usual for navigation as > the boundaries, for most uses. > > Steve > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
