On Dec 29, 2007 11:39 PM, Ben Laenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * We have no way to properly tag part-municipalities or districts, yet > we all use the name of those part-municipalities when we need to go > there. Reserving a tag like "suburb" is quite undoable: the population > of these part-municipalities and districts varies from a few dozen to > over 70.000. The latter one should really display much more prominently > than the former on the map. The latter one also should display more > prominently than another municipality with 5.000 inhabitants.
TBH I think the word suburb fits perfectly. Suburbs in AU can have any number of residents. It's mostly a division made for the purpose of streetnames and postcode boundaries. To what level is streetname uniqueness: to the "deelgemeente" or 'gemeente"? > * To be quite blunt: I don't like the usage of the city/town/... tags: > I'd like it much more that there are general tags like "municipality" > (and in our case also something like "part-municipality"), and use an > extra "population" tag to know how big to render the name. In > Belgium "city" is a title given to a municipality (I think the UK has > the same system), and if we tagged every city as such over a fifth of > all municipalities would be a city (133 of 589), which would make the > map of Belgium quite interesting... Maybe you shouldn't give them all the same tag? Maybe you should use city/town/etc *and* use the population tag. Best of both worlds. Also, you problem of how the map would look is interesting. If each city had a population tag the mapnik could display them all nicely showing the biggest first and show smaller ones as there is room. Sounds good to me (how osmarender wold deal with this I have no idea). > So, my suggestion: I'd like to see a new key "municipality" being used > from now on, and useage of the "population" key (Wikipedia has a lot of > info on that). Please not another tag..... "population" already exists as does place=town/city/foo. Let's use those. > The way I'm personally tagging things in Belgium now is: discard all > info about municipalities/districts, and use for example "town" for a > district of 70.000 inhabitants. Surely that's a nice way to get it > rendered nicely, but you'd lose the data that one belongs to the other > one. is_in wouldn't do its job to fix that: is_in=Antwerpen could mean > anything from province, arrondissement (group of municipalities, we > need a tag once for that too maybe, but that's not urgent, we don't > really use that one :-) ), municipality and district... For is_in you should try using relations. Then you have what contains what without haveing to mess with any tags at all... > Anyway, I still need to find a nice way to render the > Houthalen-Helchteren case, so it's not like: > Houthalen > Houthalen-Helchteren > Helchteren > on the map. Rendering is another problem entirely and what you want isn't really possible with any current renderers. Perhaps we should wait to see what the renderers could possibly work with before deciding on what tags might be useful. Instead, focus on what we do know: getting accurate data in the DB. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://svana.org/kleptog/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
