[OSM-talk] (no subject)

Dave Stubbs osm.list at randomjunk.co.uk
Tue Jun 2 18:40:07 BST 2009


2009/6/2 Ed Loach <ed at loach.me.uk>:
>> "Important to who?"
>
> A good question. Perhaps "prominence" rather than important?
>
> I'm in two minds about the proposal. It feels like it is tagging for
> the renderer, but could be argued that it is providing information
> about how well known a place is to allow the renderers to make more
> useful judgments as to what to render in their rules.


Yes, it's not "tagging for the renderer". It's "providing some
subjective level of importance on an ill-defined scale, that renderers
can choose to use if they so wish".

"Tagging for the renderer" in the traditional sense (and where it's
got such a bad reputation) would be tagging the park as a mountain
peak to make it show up, or even better, just deleting the mountain
because it's getting in the way of the park.

Of course just not being tagging for the renderer doesn't make it a
good idea :-)

Dave




More information about the talk mailing list