I'm a proponent of skipping is_in and openGeoDB completely: 1. that shifts the attention in the right way: to improve faulty boundaries. 2. I noticed that using is_in and openGeoDB caused a multiple country selection in my Garmin for the same country; (on my Garmin) it's technically better for the index to only use boundaries 3. It might save development time (questions about missing streets in cities with faulty boundaries)
On Fri, 06 May 2011 18:46:56 +0200, Carlos Dávila <cdavi...@orangecorreo.es> wrote: > El 06/05/11 18:02, WanMil escribió: >> Question to all: >> >> Should I remove the is_in:* and openGeoDB:* usage from the locator >> styles? >> Or should I give them lowest priority (use them only if no other >> rule >> matches)? >> >> What do you think? > There are countries where boundary polygons/relations are completely > missing. In such cases keeping is_in and openGeoDB may be useful. On > the > other side, if they are removed will encourage people to add such > information to OSM. I think we have faced similar situations other > times > in the past. > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev