sam at couter.id.au
Wed Dec 3 09:48:45 GMT 2008
Ian Sergeant <isergean at hih.com.au> wrote:
> Should we tag rural towns and localities as significant centres to
> accurately reflect their role in the surrounding area, even when they have
> a low population?
> + Yes, Some towns have very low population counts, but are very significant
> administrative and service centres to the surrounding communities. They
> are a real towns, and not just localities. We should reflect this reality
> on the map with the place= tag.
You're asking people to make a subjective judgement here. This will vary
greatly and cause arguments that can't really be settled.
> Population data shouldn't be entered at all.. It just extra information to
> get out of date, and it can be obtained elsewhere. Lets focus on what OSM
> does best, mapping to reflect the reality on the ground.
Population count is reality, and it's objective and hard to argue with.
A compromise may be to note the population in the shire/county rather
than just within the town itself. This often reflects its importance in
the region. And of course the renderer may become smart enough to
consider smaller places more important when they're a long way from
Sam Couter | mailto:sam at couter.id.au
OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the Talk-au