On Jan 10, 2008 8:55 AM, Abigail Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 10, 2008 4:37 PM, Karl Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Really? Trying to future-proof against hierarchies that have been around > > for (in some cases) millenia? Ooh, I know, we could have negative numbers to > > indicate planet, solar system, galaxy, etc. For future interstellar use. > > > > I'm not going to even bother explaining further you're going to take that > attitude. > > Please go away. >
Oh, brother. Can't tolerate a little sarcasm? The scheme just seems a little vague to me. As it is, it's difficult to correlate similar concepts across countries using this method. i.e., what's a city? It's pretty well-defined in the US where there's not a lot of historical baggage, but it's more complex in other countries, and only a few countries have provided specific local definitions for the admin levels. Adding more levels will not make the process easier. Which level do I pick if I want to know what city a street is part of? Karl
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
