Andrew Sydney was mostly empty post-licence change (for reasons I will not go in to now) and lots of the roads were re-traced in an mad dash to patch things up. At the time there was some expectation that it wouldn't take all too much time for the street names to be fixed (given that Sydney is not sooo small and in principle should support quite a large OSM community), but as you see that didn't happen quite so fast. In any case thank you for your work.
Simon
Am 06.12.2015 um 02:54 schrieb Andrew Davidson:
> Rather ironically I'm about half a dozen suburbs from completing
> Sydney. When I started other people had done about 25% of the suburbs
> and I carried on with their approach of using the existing OSM map
> features that corresponded to the boundaries which are mostly streets,
> property boundaries and waterways. (Let me tell you I've see quite a
> large number of Sydney backyards ;-) ) I'd been using the ABS2011 as
> the basis for this but I had been checking with the NSWLPI stuff to
> see where they differed. I'd say that the ABS stuff was about 80-90%
> accurate with a few suburbs having very different boundaries and there
> being a number of new suburbs created since 2011. The interesting
> thing about the NSWLPI boundaries is that they don't always appear to
> be correct either (ie: boundaries obviously following streamlines but
> not lining up the the streams, probably because the data comes from a
> number of upstream data sources of varying accuracy) and that they
> have a lot of fine detail in them (ie: the suburb boundary jumping
> from one side of the street to the other or detouring up a walk way
> and back again, or passing straight through buildings).
>
> So there is a lot of interpretative work that went into putting these
> into OSM.
>
> What I quickly learnt was that the state of the OSM map in Sydney is
> pretty poor at the moment. It looks OK from low zoom levels but once
> you go in you discover that there are entire suburbs with no street
> names and that the street tracing is pretty rough in places. I'm
> guessing the problem has been that some of the early stuff was traced
> from NearMaps and the later stuff is from Bing.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sunday, 6 December 2015, 9:14, cleary <o...@97k.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I have approached the NSW Government and have received permission for
> OpenStreetMap to use specified data from Land and Property Information
> NSW.
>
> I have added the appropriate attribution in the Contributors page of the
> wiki under New South Wales Government data and it includes a link
> ("explicit permission") to a transcription of the correspondence
> received, so that the details of the specified permission and requested
> attribution can be scrutinised.
>
> I do not have the skills to import whole datasets safely but it is my
> intention to utilise individual items of data where I can do so when
> editing OSM. I also recognise the dangers in importing data on a
> wholesale basis, for example the official NSW suburb boundaries (as
> shown in LPI data) are not the same as the ABS approximations which have
> already been included in some places and there would be scope for
> serious conflict of data if this particular LPI dataset were to be
> imported without a lot of care.
>
> Is there anything else that needs to be done in regard to appropriate
> publication of permission in the wiki?
>
> I trust other users editing the New South Wales map will be interested
> in this new (and very rich) source of data.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
