> What a shame. It seems that in lieu of having any buildings marked out, using property borders would have been a useful way to indicate addresses
In general its a huge rabbit hole to get stuck down if using cadastre/data where government works in the torrens title first, addresses second approach. There is an idea of a 'real property description' in common use in the property/finance industry, based on joining the human readable address to a collection of lot/plan references owned by a person. One is a location label system (addresses as labels), one is a legal concept, and partly related to the physical representation of it as a spatial boundary. What becomes a huge pain is when those three concepts don't all fit perfectly - a fence built a metre too far 10 years ago resulting in a judge getting involved throws it all out of whack, or when a property is going to be subdivided (house knocked down, proposal made to council but not final, even if there is a new fence up), or even worse a multiple parcel property under the same ownership worth multiple addresses - think larger farms for example. 80% of the time its fine, the rest is a mess of edge cases based on a system designed around paper meeting GIS; and people using aliases, nicknames, vanity suburbs and more when labeling where things are.
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
