PSMA Administrative Boundaries

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
65 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Andrew Harvey-3
The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages data.gov.au have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA Administrative Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].

Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing global open data efforts."

Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able to comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative boundaries[4]:

    osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=administrative -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:

    ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:

3 n/a
4 State or Territory
5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.)
8 Postcode
9 Suburb and Locality
10 Suburb and Locality

(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9 and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built from [8])

Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries
Local Government Areas
Suburbs / Localities
Town Points
Wards

admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). SA is missing a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.

admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation and correction.

ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts have a slightly different name format.

All other states are empty in OSM.

Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC (VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au) already.

So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how should we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first, identify the process and then execute).


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Ewen Hill
Andrew, 
   Thank you for all the hard work and achieving this key element. I would like to look at all level numbers to standardise these and to go forward. Also happy to have a dabble of the import process and associated doco.

I would like to aski if it is possible to 
1. add the ability to have, possibly at [5], the Aboriginal nations e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_Victoria_Aboriginal_tribes_(colourmap).jpg and 
2. swap  6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council) and 7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.) as normally these areas are large than a singular LGA. 

Ewen



On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 16:25, Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]> wrote:
The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages data.gov.au have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA Administrative Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].

Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing global open data efforts."

Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able to comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative boundaries[4]:

    osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=administrative -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:

    ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:

3 n/a
4 State or Territory
5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.)
8 Postcode
9 Suburb and Locality
10 Suburb and Locality

(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9 and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built from [8])

Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries
Local Government Areas
Suburbs / Localities
Town Points
Wards

admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). SA is missing a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.

admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation and correction.

ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts have a slightly different name format.

All other states are empty in OSM.

Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC (VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au) already.

So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how should we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first, identify the process and then execute).

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


--
Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
Internet Development Australia

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Phil Wyatt
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3
Hi Andrew,

I am happy to help out BUT, I have never done any imports previously so it will be a cautious approach from me. My main interest is in Tasmania.


Cheers - Phil, 
On the road with his iPad 

On 31 Aug 2018, at 4:23 pm, Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]> wrote:

The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages data.gov.au have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA Administrative Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].

Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing global open data efforts."

Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able to comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative boundaries[4]:

    osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=administrative -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:

    ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:

3 n/a
4 State or Territory
5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.)
8 Postcode
9 Suburb and Locality
10 Suburb and Locality

(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9 and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built from [8])

Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries
Local Government Areas
Suburbs / Localities
Town Points
Wards

admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). SA is missing a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.

admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation and correction.

ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts have a slightly different name format.

All other states are empty in OSM.

Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC (VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au) already.

So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how should we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first, identify the process and then execute).

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Andrew Davidson-3
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3
On 31/8/18 16:23, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> (not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9
> and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a separate discussion but
> perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

Level 9 appears to have been intended for non-ABS derived suburbs and
level 10 for ABS. What's happened is 10 has been used for suburbs.

Do we have any data for bounded localities smaller than suburbs? I don't
know of any jurisdiction that defines sub-suburb areas, so I don't see
the point of moving away from 10.

> Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
> State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
> State Boundaries

Agree.

> admin_level 6 LGAs
> It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor
> differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT
> doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory).

Given that we have previously only had data for SA/Vic/NSW any other
data would have come from sources we were not allowed to use.

> admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

That's more a problem with the rather vague definition of what level 7
is supposed to be.

> suburbs/localities
> NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a
> number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrant investigation
> and correction.

That's a bit of understatement for Vic. I checked the Vicmap suburbs
with what's in OSM and it's not good. Currently we have ~1600 suburbs in
OSM but there are ~3000 suburbs in Vicmaps/PSMA. It would appear that
somewhere between ABS2011 and ABS2016 the number of Victorian suburbs
almost doubled.

>  So I guess the question is should we

I know that some people don't like having the admin boundaries in OSM. I
find that having the suburb/locality boundaries is useful (downloading
data by area and geo-referencing in Nominatim). The LGA boundaries less
so as most people don't really think very much about their local council
and it's odd to see it appear in an address for example. But that said
if you do the suburbs you might as well do the LGAs.

> how should we do that.

Import.

> Is anyone interested in working on this?

I am.

> If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first,
> identify the process and then execute).

You're preaching to the choir here. Amen to that.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Warin
On 31/08/18 17:20, Andrew Davidson wrote:
On 31/8/18 16:23, Andrew Harvey wrote:
(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9
and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a separate discussion but
perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

Level 9 appears to have been intended for non-ABS derived suburbs and level 10 for ABS. What's happened is 10 has been used for suburbs.

Do we have any data for bounded localities smaller than suburbs? I don't know of any jurisdiction that defines sub-suburb areas, so I don't see the point of moving away from 10.

Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries

Agree.

admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor
differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT
doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory).

Given that we have previously only had data for SA/Vic/NSW any other data would have come from sources we were not allowed to use.

admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

That's more a problem with the rather vague definition of what level 7 is supposed to be.

Nicaragua
is using it for 'Indigenous territories'. Possibly 'we' could do the same?

suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a
number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrant investigation
and correction.

That's a bit of understatement for Vic. I checked the Vicmap suburbs with what's in OSM and it's not good. Currently we have ~1600 suburbs in OSM but there are ~3000 suburbs in Vicmaps/PSMA. It would appear that somewhere between ABS2011 and ABS2016 the number of Victorian suburbs almost doubled.

 So I guess the question is should we

I know that some people don't like having the admin boundaries in OSM. I find that having the suburb/locality boundaries is useful (downloading data by area and geo-referencing in Nominatim). The LGA boundaries less so as most people don't really think very much about their local council and it's odd to see it appear in an address for example. But that said if you do the suburbs you might as well do the LGAs.

My 'problems' with the admin boundaries are;
 where they use another way that is also a road/river. And then some mapper comes along and improves the road/river .. but buggers up the admin boundary.
then I come along and 'fix it' using the LPI Base map .. and put that source on the way.

2 things on my wish list ;
that admin boundaries don't use other 'close enough' ways already in OSM. This would reduce the number of times that the relationships are broken.
that admin boundaries have a source tag on there ways to say what the source is. This means when I come along and fix a broken one my source statement will not be confusing when looking at  the relationship as that  relationship will have no source tag.


how should we do that.

Import.
Import.

Is anyone interested in working on this?

I am.
Not me.

If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first,
identify the process and then execute).

You're preaching to the choir here. Amen to that.




_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

cleary
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3

Permission to include the PSMA Boundaries in OSM is great news.

In regard to questions and comments from other mappers:
-  I find the current boundaries in NSW and SA to be useful i.e. include LGA and suburb/locality. However, electoral boundaries including local government wards seem very specialised and are probably better mapped elsewhere.
-  I find LGA boundaries useful. Where a road suddenly changes name, changes surface, reversals of housenumbers occur etc., these phenomena often become understandable when you see where LGA boundaries lie.
- I agree that it is inappropriate to map administrative boundaries on the same way as natural phenomena such as rivers. The boundaries are usually where the river flowed sometime in the past when an early survey was done. The boundaries do not change but the rivers often do. I think it best always to map administrative boundaries separate from natural features.
- It would be possible to change suburbs from level 10 to level 9 if others find that useful but I think that sub-suburb localities such as neighbourhoods are not "administrative" nor (to my knowledge) are they defined by a government authority so I am unsure what level 10 could be used for, if suburbs are made level 9.

I am interested in administrative boundaries and willing to help where I can - however I am just an enthusiast not a mapping professional - I would not be confident to attempt any large scale import, if that is envisaged. However, if individuals are each taking an area and gradually adding new boundaries or checking existing boundaries against PSMA data, I would be interested in contributing, once the process is agreed.

Thanks again to Andrew Harvey - this is a great enhancement to data in OSM.




On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, at 4:23 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages data.gov.au have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA Administrative Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].

Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing global open data efforts."

Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able to comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative boundaries[4]:

    osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=administrative -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:

    ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:

3 n/a
4 State or Territory
5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.)
8 Postcode
9 Suburb and Locality
10 Suburb and Locality

(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9 and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built from [8])

Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries
Local Government Areas
Suburbs / Localities
Town Points
Wards

admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). SA is missing a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.

admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation and correction.

ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts have a slightly different name format.

All other states are empty in OSM.

Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC (VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au) already.

So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how should we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first, identify the process and then execute).

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Lee Mason
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3

Yes, good work getting the waiver. I would also agree not to include electoral boundaries. And my primary interest would also be Tasmania.

 

The state (and probably more broadly) already has a comprehensive naming of localities and suburbs from surveys, but mostly from the GeoScience Australia place names dataset. I would think that when integrating PSMA boundaries, it would be important to preserve these place nodes which more accurately pinpoint the locations of smaller communities (even if it is only a cluster of a few homes), which would not necessarily be the centroid of the relation.

 

And just hand-waving some possible scenario/solution: nodes of place=hamlet or lower would be integrated with the PSMA locality region. The node would be take role:label in the relation. The relation would place=hamlet as well as boundary=admin?

 

 

 


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Andrew Harvey-3
In reply to this post by Ewen Hill
Good to see there is a lot of interest in this. Local knowledge is going to be key to ensuring success if we undertake work to bring this into OSM.

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 16:45, Ewen Hill <[hidden email]> wrote:
I would like to aski if it is possible to 
1. add the ability to have, possibly at [5], the Aboriginal nations e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_Victoria_Aboriginal_tribes_(colourmap).jpg and 
 
2. swap  6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council) and 7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.) as normally these areas are large than a singular LGA. 

Despite what is on the OSM wiki, admin_level=7 is only really being used in ACT at the moment, Greater Sydney isn't really an admin boundary. I can only comment for NSW, but we have regions like Hunter, Central Coast, Illawarra, South Coast, New England, Eastern Suburbs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_New_South_Wales but I've been tagging these using place=district.

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 17:21, Andrew Davidson <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 31/8/18 16:23, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> (not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9
> and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a separate discussion but
> perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

Level 9 appears to have been intended for non-ABS derived suburbs and 
level 10 for ABS. What's happened is 10 has been used for suburbs.

Given ABS has pretty much nothing to do with how suburbs/localities are defined, not sure that makes sense going forward.
 
Do we have any data for bounded localities smaller than suburbs? I don't 
know of any jurisdiction that defines sub-suburb areas, so I don't see 
the point of moving away from 10.

Maybe as informal places which we can use place https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aplace tags for, but I'm not aware of any which justify using boundary=administrative.
 
I know that some people don't like having the admin boundaries in OSM. I 
find that having the suburb/locality boundaries is useful (downloading 
data by area and geo-referencing in Nominatim).

I feel this too, it's not data that we are really creating or adding value but I can see having it in OSM can make it easier to use other OSM data as well as helping to contributing to a global dataset with consistent schema.
 
The LGA boundaries less 
so as most people don't really think very much about their local council 
and it's odd to see it appear in an address for example. But that said 
if you do the suburbs you might as well do the LGAs.

I hear you, but they are surveyable (usually street signs are branded with the LGA and signs telling you when you enter the more rural shires) and it is handy to be able to use OSM to easily check the LGA boundaries and have all the attached metadata (website, phone number etc).

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 17:53, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
My 'problems' with the admin boundaries are;
 where they use another way that is also a road/river. And then some mapper comes along and improves the road/river .. but buggers up the admin boundary. 
then I come along and 'fix it' using the LPI Base map .. and put that source on the way. 

I've seen this problem too, especially for new mappers who want to change a road, add turn restrictions etc. it's too easy to break relations like the admin boundary. I think this is just the cost of having this data in OSM that occasionally it will break and need fixing. Hopefully editors will improve to reduce the risk but might be something we have to accept.
 

2 things on my wish list ;
that admin boundaries don't use other 'close enough' ways already in OSM. This would reduce the number of times that the relationships are broken.
that admin boundaries have a source tag on there ways to say what the source is. This means when I come along and fix a broken one my source statement will not be confusing when looking at  the relationship as that  relationship will have no source tag. 

No problem with that.

Generally I wouldn't treat these boundaries as coordinates carved in stone that absolutely must be fixed in OSM. I think it's fine if there they are out my a few meters if it makes sense to line them up with a road or river, especially if those boundaries are defined by the road or river. 

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 22:17, cleary <[hidden email]> wrote:
- I agree that it is inappropriate to map administrative boundaries on the same way as natural phenomena such as rivers. The boundaries are usually where the river flowed sometime in the past when an early survey was done. The boundaries do not change but the rivers often do. I think it best always to map administrative boundaries separate from natural features.

I'm on the fence about this, I think it depends how they are defined, if the suburb boundary is defined to follow a road, then the admin boundary should use that road as part of the relation, same for rivers.
 
- It would be possible to change suburbs from level 10 to level 9 if others find that useful but I think that sub-suburb localities such as neighbourhoods are not "administrative" nor (to my knowledge) are they defined by a government authority so I am unsure what level 10 could be used for, if suburbs are made level 9.

I agree, these lower levels are likely not administrative, so could simply use the place tag.

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 22:21, Lee Mason <[hidden email]> wrote:

The state (and probably more broadly) already has a comprehensive naming of localities and suburbs from surveys, but mostly from the GeoScience Australia place names dataset. I would think that when integrating PSMA boundaries, it would be important to preserve these place nodes which more accurately pinpoint the locations of smaller communities (even if it is only a cluster of a few homes), which would not necessarily be the centroid of the relation.


Absolutely, as you point out that's where the place tags come into play https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aplace, the admin boundaries can exist completely independently to places. I'd only mix them if they really are the same thing. Generally this might be true for place=suburb, but probably not for place=town,village,hamlet etc.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

cleary
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3

A month ago, we celebrated the news that OSM now has approval to use the PSMA Administrative Boundaries and there was some discussion, including the need for a proper import process.  I am willing to start adding some boundaries in areas with which I am familiar/interested but I am waiting for the proper import process to be determined. I am not aware if anything has been done in regard to a plan to import this data. If so, please guide me. If not, I propose the following:


Individual mappers download most recent data from https://data.gov.au/dataset/psma-administrative-boundaries and add/check data in their areas of interest and/or when they have time.  (Andrew Harvey has provided a script to assist working with PSMA Administrative Boundaries Data and there is a link on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Catalogue)

Administrative boundaries in NSW, SA, VIC and ACT be modified instance-by-instance if there are discrepancies that require updating. Where there are discrepancies, the most recent data is usually preferred . If there are concerns about accuracy of the most recent data, further consultation with other mappers or relevant government boundary authorities would be appropriate.

In QLD, WA, TAS and NT :  LGA and Suburb/Locality boundaries be added one at a time, integrating with existing data where appropriate.  Previous data from unauthorised sources be deleted or the authorised source be added if the data is accurate.

LGA Boundaries continue to be tagged as admin_level=6
Suburb/Locality boundaries be tagged as admin_level=10

In both instances source=PSMA_Admin_Boundaries_August_2018 
(or whichever date is applicable to the most recent data being used)
This source information may seem unwieldy but provides accuracy and completeness of information.

Administrative boundaries NOT be attached to other ways such as creeks, rivers, roads, etcetera so that the other features can be modified as needed without affecting the administrative boundaries which are generally static.

Multiple administrative boundaries (including national_parks and government approved protected_areas or state forests) be mapped on a single way, where appropriate, and with multiple relations attached to that single way i.e. a single way could form the boundaries for localities, LGAs and a national park, if appropriate in the particular location.

Electoral boundaries NOT be added at this time.

Other boundaries which have been discussed, such as regions and indigenous areas, NOT be added as part of this particular project unless they are LGAs or Suburbs/Localities (some indigenous areas may be identified as protected areas or defined localities or LGAs, in which case they are added and identified on that basis). Mapping of regions could be further discussed separately if required. They are usually not defined by legislation and therefore usually not "administrative" in the way that LGAs and Suburbs/Localities are legislated.


Comments and feedback, please.




On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, at 4:23 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages data.gov.au have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA Administrative Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].

Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing global open data efforts."

Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able to comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative boundaries[4]:

    osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=administrative -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:

    ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:

3 n/a
4 State or Territory
5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.)
8 Postcode
9 Suburb and Locality
10 Suburb and Locality

(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9 and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built from [8])

Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries
Local Government Areas
Suburbs / Localities
Town Points
Wards

admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). SA is missing a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.

admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation and correction.

ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts have a slightly different name format.

All other states are empty in OSM.

Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC (VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au) already.

So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how should we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first, identify the process and then execute).

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Joel H.-2

Hi cleary (and everyone),

This is excellent news, I wasn't aware of this. I think this is great and would be interested in importing Queensland's

My first though is to add a fixme notice (in similar fashion to the NSW import), that tells us to reconsider the place label node already in OSM, and to integrate it with the boundary data.

I'm going to check the shapefiles, but in the meantime, what other considerations need to be made?


--Joel

On 5/10/18 11:42 am, cleary wrote:

A month ago, we celebrated the news that OSM now has approval to use the PSMA Administrative Boundaries and there was some discussion, including the need for a proper import process.  I am willing to start adding some boundaries in areas with which I am familiar/interested but I am waiting for the proper import process to be determined. I am not aware if anything has been done in regard to a plan to import this data. If so, please guide me. If not, I propose the following:


Individual mappers download most recent data from https://data.gov.au/dataset/psma-administrative-boundaries and add/check data in their areas of interest and/or when they have time.  (Andrew Harvey has provided a script to assist working with PSMA Administrative Boundaries Data and there is a link on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Catalogue)

Administrative boundaries in NSW, SA, VIC and ACT be modified instance-by-instance if there are discrepancies that require updating. Where there are discrepancies, the most recent data is usually preferred . If there are concerns about accuracy of the most recent data, further consultation with other mappers or relevant government boundary authorities would be appropriate.

In QLD, WA, TAS and NT :  LGA and Suburb/Locality boundaries be added one at a time, integrating with existing data where appropriate.  Previous data from unauthorised sources be deleted or the authorised source be added if the data is accurate.

LGA Boundaries continue to be tagged as admin_level=6
Suburb/Locality boundaries be tagged as admin_level=10

In both instances source=PSMA_Admin_Boundaries_August_2018 
(or whichever date is applicable to the most recent data being used)
This source information may seem unwieldy but provides accuracy and completeness of information.

Administrative boundaries NOT be attached to other ways such as creeks, rivers, roads, etcetera so that the other features can be modified as needed without affecting the administrative boundaries which are generally static.

Multiple administrative boundaries (including national_parks and government approved protected_areas or state forests) be mapped on a single way, where appropriate, and with multiple relations attached to that single way i.e. a single way could form the boundaries for localities, LGAs and a national park, if appropriate in the particular location.

Electoral boundaries NOT be added at this time.

Other boundaries which have been discussed, such as regions and indigenous areas, NOT be added as part of this particular project unless they are LGAs or Suburbs/Localities (some indigenous areas may be identified as protected areas or defined localities or LGAs, in which case they are added and identified on that basis). Mapping of regions could be further discussed separately if required. They are usually not defined by legislation and therefore usually not "administrative" in the way that LGAs and Suburbs/Localities are legislated.


Comments and feedback, please.




On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, at 4:23 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages data.gov.au have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA Administrative Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].

Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing global open data efforts."

Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able to comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative boundaries[4]:

    osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=administrative -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:

    ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:

3 n/a
4 State or Territory
5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.)
8 Postcode
9 Suburb and Locality
10 Suburb and Locality

(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9 and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built from [8])

Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries
Local Government Areas
Suburbs / Localities
Town Points
Wards

admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). SA is missing a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.

admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation and correction.

ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts have a slightly different name format.

All other states are empty in OSM.

Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC (VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au) already.

So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how should we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first, identify the process and then execute).

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Joel H.-2

OK everyone I am currently editing the LGA shapefiles for QLD so no one should attempt as to not create conflicts (although I'm not currently working on the suburbs file).

The PSMA data isn't good IMO. And requires a lot of fixing to be imported, lots of problems with overlapping ways.

But the biggest problem is that the names are all caps! Does anyone know a way to automatically convert all of these properly so that "BRISBANE" is "Brisbane"?

On 6/10/18 12:07 pm, Joel H. wrote:

Hi cleary (and everyone),

This is excellent news, I wasn't aware of this. I think this is great and would be interested in importing Queensland's

My first though is to add a fixme notice (in similar fashion to the NSW import), that tells us to reconsider the place label node already in OSM, and to integrate it with the boundary data.

I'm going to check the shapefiles, but in the meantime, what other considerations need to be made?


--Joel

On 5/10/18 11:42 am, cleary wrote:

A month ago, we celebrated the news that OSM now has approval to use the PSMA Administrative Boundaries and there was some discussion, including the need for a proper import process.  I am willing to start adding some boundaries in areas with which I am familiar/interested but I am waiting for the proper import process to be determined. I am not aware if anything has been done in regard to a plan to import this data. If so, please guide me. If not, I propose the following:


Individual mappers download most recent data from https://data.gov.au/dataset/psma-administrative-boundaries and add/check data in their areas of interest and/or when they have time.  (Andrew Harvey has provided a script to assist working with PSMA Administrative Boundaries Data and there is a link on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Catalogue)

Administrative boundaries in NSW, SA, VIC and ACT be modified instance-by-instance if there are discrepancies that require updating. Where there are discrepancies, the most recent data is usually preferred . If there are concerns about accuracy of the most recent data, further consultation with other mappers or relevant government boundary authorities would be appropriate.

In QLD, WA, TAS and NT :  LGA and Suburb/Locality boundaries be added one at a time, integrating with existing data where appropriate.  Previous data from unauthorised sources be deleted or the authorised source be added if the data is accurate.

LGA Boundaries continue to be tagged as admin_level=6
Suburb/Locality boundaries be tagged as admin_level=10

In both instances source=PSMA_Admin_Boundaries_August_2018 
(or whichever date is applicable to the most recent data being used)
This source information may seem unwieldy but provides accuracy and completeness of information.

Administrative boundaries NOT be attached to other ways such as creeks, rivers, roads, etcetera so that the other features can be modified as needed without affecting the administrative boundaries which are generally static.

Multiple administrative boundaries (including national_parks and government approved protected_areas or state forests) be mapped on a single way, where appropriate, and with multiple relations attached to that single way i.e. a single way could form the boundaries for localities, LGAs and a national park, if appropriate in the particular location.

Electoral boundaries NOT be added at this time.

Other boundaries which have been discussed, such as regions and indigenous areas, NOT be added as part of this particular project unless they are LGAs or Suburbs/Localities (some indigenous areas may be identified as protected areas or defined localities or LGAs, in which case they are added and identified on that basis). Mapping of regions could be further discussed separately if required. They are usually not defined by legislation and therefore usually not "administrative" in the way that LGAs and Suburbs/Localities are legislated.


Comments and feedback, please.




On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, at 4:23 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages data.gov.au have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA Administrative Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].

Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing global open data efforts."

Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able to comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative boundaries[4]:

    osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=administrative -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:

    ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:

3 n/a
4 State or Territory
5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.)
8 Postcode
9 Suburb and Locality
10 Suburb and Locality

(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9 and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built from [8])

Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries
Local Government Areas
Suburbs / Localities
Town Points
Wards

admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). SA is missing a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.

admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation and correction.

ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts have a slightly different name format.

All other states are empty in OSM.

Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC (VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au) already.

So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how should we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first, identify the process and then execute).

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Andrew Harvey-3
In reply to this post by cleary
On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 at 11:43, cleary <[hidden email]> wrote:
> A month ago, we celebrated the news that OSM now has approval to use the PSMA Administrative Boundaries and there was some discussion, including the need for a proper import process.  I am willing to start adding some boundaries in areas with which I am familiar/interested but I am waiting for the proper import process to be determined. I am not aware if anything has been done in regard to a plan to import this data. If so, please guide me.

Glad to see people are interested in bringing this data into OSM. I'm
strongly of the view that we should discuss and document the import
process before beginning, so naturally that's the first step.

>If not, I propose the following:
> Individual mappers download most recent data from https://data.gov.au/dataset/psma-administrative-boundaries and add/check data in their areas of interest and/or when they have time.  (Andrew Harvey has provided a script to assist working with PSMA Administrative Boundaries Data and there is a link on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Catalogue)
>
> Administrative boundaries in NSW, SA, VIC and ACT be modified instance-by-instance if there are discrepancies that require updating. Where there are discrepancies, the most recent data is usually preferred . If there are concerns about accuracy of the most recent data, further consultation with other mappers or relevant government boundary authorities would be appropriate.
>
> In QLD, WA, TAS and NT :  LGA and Suburb/Locality boundaries be added one at a time, integrating with existing data where appropriate.  Previous data from unauthorised sources be deleted or the authorised source be added if the data is accurate.
>
> LGA Boundaries continue to be tagged as admin_level=6
> Suburb/Locality boundaries be tagged as admin_level=10

I agree.

> In both instances source=PSMA_Admin_Boundaries_August_2018
> (or whichever date is applicable to the most recent data being used)
> This source information may seem unwieldy but provides accuracy and completeness of information.

I'm on the fence on this, while the source tag on the feature can be
very handy for mappers, I've also seen the downside where as other
tags are added later on it becomes unclear what actually came from
that source. Where do you propose this tag to go, on the relation or
on the way members of the relation?

Consistent with existing LGA boundaries in OSM I'm proposing we use
relations with the tags:

type=boundary
boundary=administrative
admin_level=6
place=municipality

with optional tags

short_name=Sydney
name=City of Sydney
wikidata=
wikipedia= (optional with wikidata tag)
website=
phone=
email=

the admin boundary ways as "outer" members.

Consistent with existing Suburb/Locality boundaries in OSM I'm
proposing we use relations with the tags:

type=boundary
boundary=administrative
admin_level=10
place=suburb
name=

with optional tags:

postal_code (although there's not 1:1 match between postal areas and
suburbs, I'm okay with adding a postal code that generally applies to
the suburb so long as it's not coming from copyrighted sources)
wikidata
wikipedia (optional with wikidata tag)

> Administrative boundaries NOT be attached to other ways such as creeks, rivers, roads, etcetera so that the other features can be modified as needed without affecting the administrative boundaries which are generally static.

I disagree with that. If the admin boundary seems to follow the creek,
river, road, coastline then we should use that existing way as part of
the relation.

I'd like to avoid a "mess" of multiple ways all very close to each
other and overlapping.

Plus if the boundary is defined as that river, road, coastline then by
using the existing way we are able to capture that detail in OSM in a
way that almost all other spatial data cannot.

> Multiple administrative boundaries (including national_parks and government approved protected_areas or state forests) be mapped on a single way, where appropriate, and with multiple relations attached to that single way i.e. a single way could form the boundaries for localities, LGAs and a national park, if appropriate in the particular location.

I agree.

> Electoral boundaries NOT be added at this time.

I agree.

> Other boundaries which have been discussed, such as regions and indigenous areas, NOT be added as part of this particular project unless they are LGAs or Suburbs/Localities (some indigenous areas may be identified as protected areas or defined localities or LGAs, in which case they are added and identified on that basis). Mapping of regions could be further discussed separately if required. They are usually not defined by legislation and therefore usually not "administrative" in the way that LGAs and Suburbs/Localities are legislated.

I agree, plus these other types of regions aren't covered by the PSMA
Admin Boundaries dataset anyway, so let's leave that as a separate
discussion.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Andrew Harvey-3
In reply to this post by Joel H.-2
On Sat, 6 Oct 2018 at 15:57, Joel H. <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> OK everyone I am currently editing the LGA shapefiles for QLD so no one should attempt as to not create conflicts (although I'm not currently working on the suburbs file).

Don't worry, no one should actually be doing any importing until we
get community consensus and a plan in place.

> The PSMA data isn't good IMO. And requires a lot of fixing to be imported, lots of problems with overlapping ways.

Do you have examples of the overlapping ways? It looks pretty okay
around Brisbane to me. Here's an a mesh of the LGA's in GeoJSON which
you can import into JOSM with enough memory.
https://tianjara.net/data/LGA_mesh.geojson.xz

> But the biggest problem is that the names are all caps! Does anyone know a way to automatically convert all of these properly so that "BRISBANE" is "Brisbane"?

That's fairly easy to as a preprocessing step, eg with ogr2osm or via
other scripts.

I've been working on processing the PSMA data to make it easier to
import. Since I think we should reuse existing ways where possible, if
we did that it's a mostly manual process anyway. Even without reusing
existing way, to get relations you need shared ways on the borders.

One approach is to use https://github.com/andrewharvey/geojson-mesh to
get single ways for the border which we then manually join up into the
full relations in JOSM.

> On 6/10/18 12:07 pm, Joel H. wrote:
> My first though is to add a fixme notice (in similar fashion to the NSW import), that tells us to reconsider the place label node already in OSM, and to integrate it with the boundary data.

If there's an existing place node, then we should use that as the
label member of the relation.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Joel H.-2
>Do you have examples of the overlapping ways? It looks pretty okay
around Brisbane to me. Here's an a mesh of the LGA's in GeoJSON which
you can import into JOSM with enough memory.
https://tianjara.net/data/LGA_mesh.geojson.xz

Just import the shapefile into JOSM and use the validation. The GeoJSON
file is looking much cleaner.


>That's fairly easy to as a preprocessing step, eg with ogr2osm or via
other scripts. I've been working on processing the PSMA data to make it
easier to import. Since I think we should reuse existing ways where
possible, if we did that it's a mostly manual process anyway. Even
without reusing existing way, to get relations you need shared ways on
the borders. One approach is to use
https://github.com/andrewharvey/geojson-mesh to get single ways for the
border which we then manually join up into the full relations in JOSM.

We might just have to do this. It would be a lot faster then trying to
find overlapping ways, at least on the LGA data.


>If there's an existing place node, then we should use that as the label
member of the relation

Yes this is what I was intending.



_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

cleary
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3

In regard to administrative boundaries being attached to other features such as waterways and roads, I think it is a trade-off between accuracy and convenience.

I am most familiar with NSW. Boundaries are not "defined" by words but rather by surveyors' charts. The surveyors may often have been directed to use waterways, roads, mountain ridges and similar features for their surveys. However the waterways and roads have sometimes/often moved but the boundaries have not.  Words are sometimes used to describe boundaries such as "it follows the river and then goes south along the main road ... " Such a description is approximate and is near enough for many purposes, especially if one's area of interest is well within the boundaries. However it may not be sufficiently precise if one is concerned with particular locations close to the boundaries.

Examples in NSW that might be considered include the boundary on the Murray River west of Tocumwal, the Lachlan River east of Cobb Highway, Willandra Creek south of Roto, Bogan River at Girilambone. If the boundaries were attached to the respective waterways, either the boundaries or the waterways would be incorrect. Where boundaries are mapped on rivers or roads, mappers may re-align the river or road as changes occur and the administraitve boundary becomes distorted, sometimes only slightly but usually increasingly significant over time. Alternatively we could map the waterway or road using the administrative boundary data (as some mappers have done in the past) and ignore the satellite imagery and GPS data but this affects the accuracy of the location of the waterway or road.

While I will accept the community's group decision, personally I think accuracy is to be valued over convenience.  I strongly advocate for accuracy by mapping administrative boundaries separate from other features on the map, even if they are nearby.  

The decision in regard to the above issue will affect use of a source tag for the boundary. If the boundary is an approximation and attached to waterways or roads then it would be incorrect to use a boundary source tag, However if boundaries are mapped separately and accurately, then we should record the source of the boundary data. While I would suggest adding the source tag to the relation for the administrative boundary, it might also be added to the way if there is any need to specify the source for the way e.g. if using the administrative boundary for the geography of a river, then also give the source of the boundary data as the source for the waterway.





_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Warin
On 06/10/18 20:52, cleary wrote:
> In regard to administrative boundaries being attached to other features such as waterways and roads, I think it is a trade-off between accuracy and convenience.
>

+1.

If the admin boundaries use other features as there boundaries then it is the other feature that takes priority in accuracy over that of the boundary.

The tags on the way will have those of the other feature, possibly including the source of that other feature.

If the admin boundary is moved because the other feature is changed then so be it.
I have come across a few admin boundaries that are attached to things .. and from now on I'll move them to match the other feature, if that is a problem for you then make the admin boundary separate. I for one am tired of separating them.



_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Andrew Harvey-3
In reply to this post by cleary
Thanks for raising that. I'd seen some boundaries in WA defined in
legislation as, follow this road, then that road etc. but I think that
was for school zones. So the LGA and Suburb/Localities are defined by
the cadastral plans then?

I hear the points and see there is consensus to not reuse existing
roads, rivers in the admin boundaries, so I support that approach.

What about admin boundaries that border the coastline? Should they
share the existing coastline or not?

That does simplify the import, as there is much less manual effort needed.

I guess what we need now is an OSM XML file with both the
Suburb/Localities and LGA boundaries together with shared ways (as
many ways are in common). I'll see what I can do to put this together,
is anyone else working on this too?

On Sat, 6 Oct 2018 at 20:53, cleary <[hidden email]> wrote:

> In regard to administrative boundaries being attached to other features such as waterways and roads, I think it is a trade-off between accuracy and convenience.
>
> I am most familiar with NSW. Boundaries are not "defined" by words but rather by surveyors' charts. The surveyors may often have been directed to use waterways, roads, mountain ridges and similar features for their surveys. However the waterways and roads have sometimes/often moved but the boundaries have not.  Words are sometimes used to describe boundaries such as "it follows the river and then goes south along the main road ... " Such a description is approximate and is near enough for many purposes, especially if one's area of interest is well within the boundaries. However it may not be sufficiently precise if one is concerned with particular locations close to the boundaries.
>
>
> Examples in NSW that might be considered include the boundary on the Murray River west of Tocumwal, the Lachlan River east of Cobb Highway, Willandra Creek south of Roto, Bogan River at Girilambone. If the boundaries were attached to the respective waterways, either the boundaries or the waterways would be incorrect. Where boundaries are mapped on rivers or roads, mappers may re-align the river or road as changes occur and the administraitve boundary becomes distorted, sometimes only slightly but usually increasingly significant over time. Alternatively we could map the waterway or road using the administrative boundary data (as some mappers have done in the past) and ignore the satellite imagery and GPS data but this affects the accuracy of the location of the waterway or road.
>
> While I will accept the community's group decision, personally I think accuracy is to be valued over convenience.  I strongly advocate for accuracy by mapping administrative boundaries separate from other features on the map, even if they are nearby.
>
> The decision in regard to the above issue will affect use of a source tag for the boundary. If the boundary is an approximation and attached to waterways or roads then it would be incorrect to use a boundary source tag, However if boundaries are mapped separately and accurately, then we should record the source of the boundary data. While I would suggest adding the source tag to the relation for the administrative boundary, it might also be added to the way if there is any need to specify the source for the way e.g. if using the administrative boundary for the geography of a river, then also give the source of the boundary data as the source for the waterway.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Warin
On 06/10/18 21:34, Andrew Harvey wrote:

> Thanks for raising that. I'd seen some boundaries in WA defined in
> legislation as, follow this road, then that road etc. but I think that
> was for school zones. So the LGA and Suburb/Localities are defined by
> the cadastral plans then?
>
> I hear the points and see there is consensus to not reuse existing
> roads, rivers in the admin boundaries, so I support that approach.
>
> What about admin boundaries that border the coastline? Should they
> share the existing coastline or not?

OSM has defined the 'coast line' as the high tide mark as that is easier to pick than the low or mid tide marks.
It is probable that the admin boundaries use the low tide mark?
Do a sample comparison?


>
> That does simplify the import, as there is much less manual effort needed.
>
> I guess what we need now is an OSM XML file with both the
> Suburb/Localities and LGA boundaries together with shared ways (as
> many ways are in common). I'll see what I can do to put this together,
> is anyone else working on this too?
>
> On Sat, 6 Oct 2018 at 20:53, cleary <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> In regard to administrative boundaries being attached to other features such as waterways and roads, I think it is a trade-off between accuracy and convenience.
>>
>> I am most familiar with NSW. Boundaries are not "defined" by words but rather by surveyors' charts. The surveyors may often have been directed to use waterways, roads, mountain ridges and similar features for their surveys. However the waterways and roads have sometimes/often moved but the boundaries have not.  Words are sometimes used to describe boundaries such as "it follows the river and then goes south along the main road ... " Such a description is approximate and is near enough for many purposes, especially if one's area of interest is well within the boundaries. However it may not be sufficiently precise if one is concerned with particular locations close to the boundaries.
>>
>>
>> Examples in NSW that might be considered include the boundary on the Murray River west of Tocumwal, the Lachlan River east of Cobb Highway, Willandra Creek south of Roto, Bogan River at Girilambone. If the boundaries were attached to the respective waterways, either the boundaries or the waterways would be incorrect. Where boundaries are mapped on rivers or roads, mappers may re-align the river or road as changes occur and the administraitve boundary becomes distorted, sometimes only slightly but usually increasingly significant over time. Alternatively we could map the waterway or road using the administrative boundary data (as some mappers have done in the past) and ignore the satellite imagery and GPS data but this affects the accuracy of the location of the waterway or road.
>>
>> While I will accept the community's group decision, personally I think accuracy is to be valued over convenience.  I strongly advocate for accuracy by mapping administrative boundaries separate from other features on the map, even if they are nearby.
>>
>> The decision in regard to the above issue will affect use of a source tag for the boundary. If the boundary is an approximation and attached to waterways or roads then it would be incorrect to use a boundary source tag, However if boundaries are mapped separately and accurately, then we should record the source of the boundary data. While I would suggest adding the source tag to the relation for the administrative boundary, it might also be added to the way if there is any need to specify the source for the way e.g. if using the administrative boundary for the geography of a river, then also give the source of the boundary data as the source for the waterway.
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

cleary
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3


In regard to admin boundaries sharing the coastline, I think that would also be incorrect but I am less confident of my view on this.

I did update some administrative boundaries in South Australia using the SA Government Data and those boundaries did not coincide with the coastline (see the coastline around Streaky Bay, Ceduna, Fowlers Bay and near the Nullarbor).  The coastline in OSM needs a lot of work - I have looked at parts of WA and SA but found it very difficult to use the satellite imagery correctly to refine the map of the coastline in areas where there are extensive mudflats or large tidal flows and even rocky areas just under/above the waterline. But I suggest it is safest, and more accurate, to map the administrative boundaries and the coastline separately.






_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PSMA Administrative Boundaries

Warin
On 07/10/18 11:22, cleary wrote:
>
> In regard to admin boundaries sharing the coastline, I think that would also be incorrect but I am less confident of my view on this.
>
> I did update some administrative boundaries in South Australia using the SA Government Data and those boundaries did not coincide with the coastline (see the coastline around Streaky Bay, Ceduna, Fowlers Bay and near the Nullarbor).  The coastline in OSM needs a lot of work - I have looked at parts of WA and SA but found it very difficult to use the satellite imagery correctly to refine the map of the coastline in areas where there are extensive mudflats or large tidal flows and even rocky areas just under/above the waterline. But I suggest it is safest, and more accurate, to map the administrative boundaries and the coastline separately.

Might be good to look at Broome for hi/low tide .. there is a fair distance between the two there so it would be easy to pick in that location.


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
1234