[Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisationonly based on population

John F. Eldredge john at jfeldredge.com
Thu May 27 18:03:07 BST 2010


In the USA, the definition varies from state to state.  For example, Tennessee (where I live) does not have an official definition of town vs. city, and every town or city is contained within a county.  In Virginia, towns are contained within counties, and subordinate to them; cities are independent of counties, even if geographically surrounded by them.

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- john at jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria

-----Original Message-----
From: Simone Saviolo <simone.saviolo at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 16:43:36 
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools<tagging at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Proposed feature : World wide place=* standardisation
	only based on population

2010/5/27 sly (sylvain letuffe) <liste at letuffe.org>:
> Here is another try for world wide standardisation of places in order to
> hopefully try to create a consistent database and not a renderer work around
> font label positionning system

-1, if it's exclusively population-based. The risk is that the US have
tenths of cities and smaller countries - say, dunno, Uganda - get
none.

It's not a matter of getting the label to look cool. If you are
looking for objective data, then tag the population. The definition of
"city" and its differences from "town" varies from culture to culture,
and from country to country. In the last few days there has been quite
some discussion in talk-it about this, and there was consensus that
the tagging of cities should somehow convey an idea about the urban
texture of the country.

> sly

Regards,

Simone

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


More information about the Tagging mailing list