> On 30 Apr 2014, at 10:53 pm, Michael Gratton <m...@vee.net> wrote: > Yeah, I noticed that last night. My inclination was to pretend it isn't a > problem until the LPI comes around, then make everything align to that. :) I > don't disagree that adjacent property boundaries should share ways, but I'm > inclined to prefer suburb boundaries have their own, since they are political > at best (social at worst) and hence independent of land title boundaries. > TRhe splitting of Newtown between the Sydney and Marrickville councils was a > good example. In any case, Mapbox for me is giving a pixel's width difference > between the three, so I'm not confident about using that (or Bing) to try to > rectify (so to speak) the situation at the moment. >
I agree that if and when we can use the definitive suburb boundaries we should use their line. The ABS data just doesn't have the accuracy for that in my experience. I think you'll generally find in cases like this that the actual boundary is the property line. So fingers crossed for positive response from LPI! > What happened to Bing anyway? About a year ago they loaded new Sydney and surround imagery that was all offset. Yes you can manually adjust, but there is getting to be more and more stuff unaligned. I contacted bing maps but no response. If you are going to use bing then it must be aligned to known good features or easier still to mapbox imagery. Ian _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
