Hi @Aleksandar Matejevic,
Thanks for pointing this out.

Yes there is a lot of weird things in the administrative boundaries mapping...

For the official part :
There has been different decrets (https://dev2lexpol.cloud.pf/LexpolAfficheTexte.php?texte=176935 and https://dev2lexpol.cloud.pf/LexpolAfficheTexte.php?texte=216633) about the creation of commune in French Polynesia. The subdivision (level 6) are to be a composition of admin 8 (commune) (see decret https://dev2lexpol.cloud.pf/LexpolAfficheTexte.php?texte=177598). Commune have competences over the lagoon but it is not taken into account into the commune limites (it is confusing i think).
The official boundaries fit on the land as for now, and is shared on the local opendata sharing platform by the government and can be found here https://www.tefenua.data.gov.pf/datasets/3e956e20eec344bfb147682a38d7383e_0/

Wiki page about administrative boundaries mapping :
General OSM Community : osm.wiki/FR:Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative The local page wich is a bit more specific osm.wiki/FR:French_Polynesia/FR:French_Polynesia_tagging_guidelines#Limites_administratives

Hope this helps,
I will try to clean this,
Best regards,
Violaine

Hello Alain, A priori tu utilises l'imagerie Bing d'apres la source de ton changeset pour ajouter un batiment ici, est ce bien le cas? (il n'y a rien sur l'imagerie). Peut être préciser la source utilisée les prochaines fois (ça peut être ta connaissance locale). A bientôt :)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161394386

Iaorana et merci pour tes nombreuses contributions! Attention lorsque tu déplaces les batiment à bien ajuster l'imgerie avant. Les batis originellement ont une précision très bonne et devraient être conservés tel quel (données du Pays). Egalement, il serait préférable que tu groupes tes éditions, plutôt que de sauvegarder à chaque modification. N'hésite pas si tu as des questions.

Iaorana et merci pour tes nombreuses contributions! Attention lorsque tu déplaces les batiment à bien ajuster l'imgerie avant. Les batis originellement ont une précision très bonne et devraient être conservés tel quel (données du Pays). Egalement, il serait préférable que tu groupes tes éditions, plutôt que de sauvegarder à chaque modification. N'hésite pas si tu as des questions.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160520778

Iaorana et maeva dans OSM! Pour tes prochaines contributions, il faudrait que tu gardes en tête que le tag name ne doit pas servir à décrire un élément. Tu peux prendre connaissance des autres bonnes pratiques ici : osm.wiki/FR:French_Polynesia/Bonnes_Pratiques Bonne continuation!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160112495

Ia Ora Na et merci pour ta contribution. Ton commentaire de changeset laisse à penser que ce n'est pas un sommet que tu as ajouté mais une donnée personnelle. OSM n'héberge de telles données. J'ai donc retiré l'information. N'hésite pas à commenter si j'ai mal interprété, mauruuru roa !
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160016484

Happy mapping !

I think the best would be to take those buildings to align imagery on it depending on the location. I know it is complex but the data source is high location quality (made by land surveyors through GPS, photogrammetry).

Hi, thks, please be aware, the offset can vary because of tiling. And remember to correct only the buildings that were moved compared to orginal buildings. Here is the data source : https://www.tefenua.data.gov.pf/datasets/3daf585dd43e41b78aa3e7a0f9bcb294_17/

Thks, no worries

Hi cartogravy, could you please correct the error in alignment on this area? I have seen several of your changesets here and as discussed with your colleagues, I do not agree with the way you moved everything to fit one value you took as a reference from Strava. Here I find (-3.29, -1.09) shift in Bing my end. And so the buildings are not at the right place and many many other things. This shift seems to fit with some buildings so I would be happy with tht... Thks for your answer
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150769719

Hi, I corrected road alignment based on strava
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150760214

Thanks, it would be much appreciated!

Hi, Yes this was intentional, I think I also did the original edit. There is often steps on sidewalks so this was a wheelchair users path (low slope / access ramp). Did you changed other weird things on path / sidewalks ? (as much as you remembered, in Tahiti)

Hi birdlawyer, Sorry that I was a bit harsh on this comment, this was too many similar issues I reviewed and I got a little bit upset. I answered your colleague here (same topic), please don't hesitate to continue the discussion here then : changeset/150814189 Thks and happy mapping!

Hi, Thanks for your answer.
Just a quick info I never tried yet the strava heatmap so this is interesting. But still I didnt mean that this should be the reference, but should be taken into account rather. In some case it might be ok in others no.
So in this specific area I find (-3.73, -1.83) with esri clarified and (1.13, -3.39) with Bing. And if I use buildings it is (2.38, -1.68) with Bing and (-5.12, -2.96) with ESri clarified. I reckon the buildings are not clean in this area. So we still have a 3m diff. I would agree to take (1.13, -3.39) with Bing. Also I think generally Bing is more up to date than Esri. (i know because of some new buildings appear on Bing and not Esri). Would you agree?

Thks

Oh perfect, you are right, maybe the data got updated at a time, thks !

Yes this is perfect for me, thanks!Here is an other data source for roads : https://www.tefenua.data.gov.pf/datasets/dbe0c5c924e348bc8af063c98e42c7a0_8/ Both are interesting ... (one was a fork of the other and never get merged into one referential..)

hi rowcherry row, beware that we often have 2 roads very close and separated by a wall... this is normal :(
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150720934