[OSM-talk] capitols

[Robert (Jamie) Munro]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mike Collinson wrote:
> At 08:56 PM 12/06/2007, Robert T Wyatt wrote:
>> Here's what I'm thinking for my city node:
>>
>> <tag k="place" v="city">
>> <tag k="name" v="Austin">
>> <tag k="capital" v="yes">
>> <tag k="population" v="656,562">
>>
>> ... and then for the (separate) building node:
>>
>> <tag k="building" v="capitol">
>> <tag k="name" v="Texas State Capitol">
>>
>> Do you see obvious omissions in this mark-up (tags worth having here)? 
> 
> 
> It was suggested a while ago (Oliver?) that the is_in tag could be used for things other than just the larger administrative entities in which a place lies.  I therefore used "capitial cities" experimentally. For example
> 
> name=Canberra
> place=city
> is_in=Australia, capital cities
> 
> In hindsight, it might have been better to be more specific and said "national capitals".  You might consider using 
> 
> name=Austin
> is_in=USA,Texas,state capitals

In my opinion, this is a terrible idea. is_in is for building a
hierarchy of places. If you want to put state capitals in there, why not
all the other features. is_in=post boxes, is_in=streets...

You are trying to overload is_in to become a holder for tags. I think
it's much better to say state_capital=yes or street=yes than to mix
types inside is in. But something like place_type=state capital is
better still.

Robert Munro
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGbyqbz+aYVHdncI0RAudiAKDhHuuNZJ5DwNxJMt9qFaFHoJwLrACcCUAk
nJrD9wrlupIoh/NSzyYAmzc=
=eZpu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----