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

[sly (sylvain letuffe)]

(Multiple answers)

First, I'm aware that full classification of every populated places is not 
possible world wide with one tag only, the proposition states that clearly.
administrative, interest, tourism, local concerns need to be recorded with 
other tags. The problem I see with actual place usage is that it is not 
standardazided world wide and serves merly for writing a label on a map.

It makes it quite hard for newcomers to guess in wich case they should use 
wich place, and that proposal tries to help have a first easy step to record 
at least a population estimation.

On jeudi 27 mai 2010, Simone Saviolo wrote:
> -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.
Well, this is the truth ;-) based on such a scale. I don't see any problem in 
uganda having no megacity, because it's what is.

On jeudi 27 mai 2010, Roy Wallace wrote:
> I like your motivation. But maybe it's not necessary. Using
> population=* achieves the same goal.

Yes it does, and it does much more precisely, this is the utimate solution. 
Unfortunetly, having access to this information is much harder when you are 
driving your car thru, than a rough estimate that gives you the "approximate 
size of a hamlet" (I have to admit that the upper part of the scale is kind 
of useless as population data is much easier to get in those cases)

On vendredi 28 mai 2010, John Smith wrote:
> +1 I doubt you could ever standardise cities, especially not based on
> population alone.

That proposition is not about standarisation of cities around the world, it's 
about standardisation of the place tag usage in the osm database. I don't see 
any problem if a place=city is actually a town in the local language usage, 
(let's add a common_denomination=town) just like in france we dont care that 
our "villes" are tagged place=town. I'm concerned about database storage and 
meaning of the data, and key values could just have been numbers, but it's 
harder to remember.



On vendredi 28 mai 2010, Simone Saviolo wrote:
> consequence, while it is good to see the map of France showing five
> cities, Italy's map should instead contain a few tenths. Of course,
> this cannot be achieved if we only look at population - especially if
> we want to use a world-wide population criterion.
> 
> I hope the idea is clear.
Unfortunetly, I think I get it, you have invented/searched perfect Italian 
thresholds in order to make the mapnik at osm.org map look what you are used to 
see. Maybe you endeded to 47000 people max for a city In order that city X of 
46999 isn't shown, because it's administrative role is not enough to apear at 
zoom 10 ?
Wich, in other words is a way to say you addapted the tagging of places to the 
actual mapnik style sheet at osm.org. Is osmarender rendering the way you 
want ? maybe no... Will it survive the next mapnik at osm.org stylesheet 
update ? maybe no... 
I don't blame that need, of course, mapnik at osm.org is the perfect portal of 
the projet, and it needs to bring a decent map that every country is happy 
with, but that's tagging for the/a renderer.

What I'm looking for is go thru a first step where maps won't be as perfect 
has we want them to look (population based representation of population) 
before we consider the need of other tags in order to render correctly.


-- 
sly 
Sylvain Letuffe liste at letuffe.org
qui suis-je : http://slyserv.dyndns.org