[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - relation type=person
johnw at mac.com
Tue Oct 14 21:35:21 UTC 2014
> On Oct 14, 2014, at 9:39 PM, Janko Mihelić <janjko at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we should have notability, like Wikipedia.
Every time I mention "importance" or similar, everyone gets in a huff, as they think that it will start an edit war or something. We trust mappers to do everything, and make it "local", but never to mark what's important (except for, you know, road levels, and where they go and where they intersect) but having some kind of opinion based tag, though verifiable by other local mappers, is not allowed. For some reason. So things that should be rendered at zoom level 9 - like prominent or notable peaks, and things that should be rendered at very high zoom levels - like the tens of thousands of little named hills just in my area of japan, get rendered in a confusing soup of triangles. Because making that decision is "unverifiable", so we have to let the map be shitty for the sake of the tagging, which seems really backwards.
Making a good map is about choosing what is important to be shown at what zoom, and Unless there are varying levels of tags, then we rely on the mapper simply to not tag things to avoid confusion. Which seems counterproductive.
I imagine the "landmark" tag is as close as we got.
More information about the Tagging