OpenStreetMap

Dutton Park, Queensland

Posted by Unusual User Name on 22 June 2010 in English (English)

Dutton Park, Queensland is now complete, at least as far as I'm concerned. All building outlines and street numbers are in, although the last couple haven't rendered yet.

On an unrelated note, I think I damaged the West End/4101 boundary the other day. Labels are now appearing on the boundary line, not in the centre.
The area I was working on was the southern boundary along the river, if anyone has the skills and energy to find the problem and fix it.

Of course, it may have been broken before, but I didn't realise it.

I still haven't finished Fairfield yet.

Location: Dutton Park, Wellers Hill, City of Brisbane, Queensland, 4102, Australia

Comment from JohnSmith on 22 June 2010 at 12:15

Great work on getting Dutton Park up to such a terrific level of detail, are you planning to come help us out with Bribie Island for the next mapping party?

As for breaking the postcode/suburb boundaries, it's best to leave the admin boundaries alone unless you have a specific need to edit them, JOSM at least can now filter them from being editable or being seen altogether, and several of us are trying to make a concerted effort to split the boundaries from other ways that have been linked to them.

However all this will take time and in the mean time we patch stuff as it breaks...

Comment from Unusual User Name on 23 June 2010 at 02:26

I can't make Bribie Island, but is there any pre-party desktop mapping that would be useful?

It's true the admin boundaries can get in the way, but they can also benefit from a bit of judicious tweaking here and there. The boundaries as derived from ABS are quite different from the gazetted boundaries, at least in my part of town, so I feel OK about doing so.

Cases where the boundary lurches from side to side of the railway line, rather than down one side or the middle, crosses multiple land parcels, has roundabout humps that are quite a long way from the roundabout, or match up very poorly to river or coastline boundaries, look appalling, and to a lay person would undermine the perceived quality of the rest of the data.

Mind you, people put up with most appalling maps from Google Maps, so maybe I shouldn't be worrying.

Comment from Rhubarb on 23 June 2010 at 04:08

I've been (very slowly) tracing in houses and buildings around North Sydney.
After seeing your impressive effort up there, I'm wondering if I've been tagging house addresses correctly.
Or perhaps more specifically, what's the best way to tag?
Should I make a node in the middle of the property, in the middle of the building, or is it best to tag the building and not worry about placing a node over the building?.

The part of North Sydney I'm referring to:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-33.82697&lon=151.21053&zoom=17&layers=B000FTF

Comment from JohnSmith on 23 June 2010 at 04:21

@Fairfield
> I can't make Bribie Island, but is there any pre-party desktop mapping that would be useful?

That was Monday night, there is another such party in the Grange in
about 2 months time...

> It's true the admin boundaries can get in the way, but they can also benefit from a bit of judicious tweaking here and there. The boundaries as derived from ABS are quite different from the gazetted boundaries, at least in my part of town, so I feel OK about doing so.

If you have access to gazetted boundaries, any chance of getting them
under cc-by ? :)

> Cases where the boundary lurches from side to side of the railway line, rather than down one side or the middle, crosses multiple land parcels, has roundabout humps that are quite a long way from the roundabout, or match up very poorly to river or coastline boundaries, look appalling, and to a lay person would undermine the perceived quality of the rest of the data.

Unless we can find an authoritative source of data we're stuck with
ABS boundaries, as for the zig-zagging they tend to straighten railway
lines, but do they shift the boundary when the railway line shifted?

Again without an authoritative source the ABS data is the best we have.

> Mind you, people put up with most appalling maps from Google Maps, so maybe I shouldn't be worrying.

I'm not saying we shouldn't fix boundaries up when we have a better
source of data, but until we have a better source of data there is no
point in trying to fix it.

Comment from Unusual User Name on 24 June 2010 at 03:09

Ruhbarb

I believe the standard is to add the address to the building outline, however that gets complicated when there are multiple buildings (I guess you'd build a relationship, but I've never got into that), and also doesn't allow you to address vacant blocks - I've seen a number of vacant blocks with the old letter box still there. I like to record numbers for vacant blocks, so I don't have to revisit the site post-construction.

There's probably no need to do both all the time like I do, but it's a habit I got into.

There's a school of thought that you should link the buildings into a relationship with their street, and not even add the street name to the building or address point.

I think though that the street name should always be added to the building/address point. Any data extraction from OSM that I've seen doesn't include relationship data, so you'd be losing a crucial bit of information.

Comment from James Livingston on 28 June 2010 at 02:54

If you've got the building outline, adding addr:housenumber to it is great, but you can always just do a POI with that tag if not. You could do vacant block by having a POI with nothing else apart from the addr data.

I use the relation exclusively, since it means you don't have to add the street name to every single building (and makes it easier to fix if someone got the name wrong). If data conversion isn't using that and only uses addr:streetname, then we should probably fix the conversion to use it (regardless of whether people tag that way or not).

Login to leave a comment