On 5/05/2016 9:50 AM, Timothy Ney wrote:
Re: place=? An oldie but no past conclusion.
My other concern is the rendering of urban centres at certain zoom
extents. If for example, we demote all of the "towns" between
Rockhampton and Mackay to Hamlets or Villages, we are going to have
300 km of highway with nothing shown at higher levels. At present,
each of the small towns (may have 1 pub, some services, a shop and a
few houses), are labelled as towns, and appear nicely if you zoom to a
level where you can see Mackay and Rockhampton on the same map. These
"towns" indicate to drivers where they are likely to find at least
some services easily. It is difficult, unless you know the areas, to
zoom in on a particular area to locate a "village" or "hamlet" on a
300km piece of highway, where the "towns: are 30-40km apart. The same,
is likely to happen between almost all "cities" in Queensland, e.g.
Rockhampton - Emerald (300km) , Emerald to Longreach (500km) , Mackay
to Bowen (200km), etc
I suspect, an extra tag would have to be added to ensure they render
at higher zoom levels, which ultimately bring us back to simply
calling them "towns".
This is a rendering issue.
The same issue exists for roads where none are shown when zoomed out.
It has been previously suggested that renders increase the amount of
detail seen in those areas where little to nothing is shown.
----------------------------------------
My concern is that there is a clear inconsistency in the present
tagging... example
Winton is tagged as more significant than Longreach .. where as 'on the
ground' Longreach is more significant than Winton - more shops, pubs,
doctors and yes more people!
I think the 'remoteness' may be the best way to resolve the issue for
places.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
