On Tuesday 02 December 2008, Gustav Foseid wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 12:14 PM, David Earl
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > I think we could do with a richer hierarchy something like this:
> > metropolis > 500,000
> > city > 100,000
> > large_town > 25,000? 40,000?
> > town > 10,000
> > small_town / large_village > 2,500
> > village > 100
> > hamlet < 100
>
> The names could probably be discussed, but this would be huge
> improvement in naming places. It would also be useful with some
> variants of city areas, in addition to suburb.
It's a very bad idea IMHO. This is just trying to fix what's wrong with
the town/city/village tags with more of the same tags.
First of all, these numbers are completely arbitrary. Secondly, the
names already clash with certain meanings in that country ("city" being
a title in many European countries for example, and there are official
cities with less than 1000 inhabitants).
I agree it's a bit early to start rendering with other information
(municipality boundary relations and population tags), but more of
these tags looks just bad (and it would mean that all place nodes have
to be revisited to get the population anyway, so it would be better to
immediately them tag with population=*)
Ben
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
