Hi. The tag used affects how big the label is drawn, and at what zoom it appears. e.g. You have to be zoomed right in to see place=locality.
I think the location and significance of the place might affect what tag you use. Personally I'd say > 1000 people is definitely a town. If some town was remote I think I'd be more likely to call it a town than a village, as it is the only thing around. - Ben. On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 12:02 AM, Hugh Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi > > Another locally flavoured tagging question. > > I entered some towns recently. I got stuck wondering whether they were > actually towns, villages, or hamlets. > > I think Australia applies different criteria to determine this designation. > If > you follow the guidelines at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place, > it > seems to allow a village to have up to 10,00 people! Can you see where this > is > going? That may be a small place in more populous countries, but I'd > certainly > call it a town. > > Further, places like, say, Charleville (3000) or Quilpie (maybe half that) > are > definitely considered towns. They are hubs for large areas. One town I > wondered > about is Samford near Brisbane. It has 3000 or so people according to > Wikipedia, but it's been called a village. (I think it's actually known as > Samford Village.) > > So remoteness seems to count for something. > > Any other criteria you can think of? > > Is it time there were specific place designation guidelines for Oz places? > I > suspect we've been quite inconsistent in their absence. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines > > Cheers > > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
