[OSM-talk] Rendering of Place Names in Mapnik
siliconfiend at gmail.com
Thu Dec 18 16:58:37 GMT 2008
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Gustav Foseid <gustavf at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Karl Newman <siliconfiend at gmail.com>wrote:
>> You're still missing the point about San Jose--it's larger in both area
>> and population (and probably in economic activity as well), and is located
>> within an hour's drive of San Francisco, but San Francisco is better known
>> around the world and should arguably take priority in rendering.
> My idea was that major_ could be used for a city "of greater importance" of
> some kind. Someone also suggested a value metropolis for the large
> metropolitan areas.
> I do not agree that using population or area is a good way to solve this
> problem. Finding population data for all named places is not easy (this
> problem extends beyond the largest cities) and population is not necessarily
> a good way to find the most "important" place name in an area.
> - Gustav
Sure it is. If a lot of people want to live in a place, in general that
should make it more notable. Besides, I was only suggesting using population
as a tiebreaker for equal "place" key values. It's not the final answer, but
it's objective and it goes a long way toward fixing the problem. I don't
like your _major and _minor suffixes because they imply different
population, which is not how you described it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk