[OSM-talk] Proposed features: historic center
d.paleino at gmail.com
Mon Jun 15 08:29:44 BST 2009
no need to CC me, thank you :)
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 02:40:55 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2009/6/14 David Paleino <d.paleino at gmail.com>:
> > [..]
> > I agree that moving it from "landuse=historic_center" to something not
> > involving history is a good thing, but also "centre_zone" has its own issues
> > (basically, the "centre" terminology might not be appropriate in many
> > cases).
> > Ideas? Comments?
> When I wrote the proposal for centre_zone I was also thinking about an
> alternative named "core_zone" or "core" but I was not sure if this
> attempt to translate German into English would describe to a native
> person what I actually meant.
That'd be good, IMHO. I'm Italian, and I can understand what "core_zone" would
> LEO (translation-service) proposed centre_zone for the German Term
> "Kerngebiet", which is the appropriate term in German urban planning
> legislation (BauNVO=Baunutzungsverordnung).
From the Collins dictionary:
"heartland". Reading the Wikipedia page for it though, it refers to "central
areas of a country", rather than a city.
Also, translating to Italian the wiki page for Kerngebiet, it gets translated to
"Nucleo", which is exactly "Core" in English.
Although landuse=core (or core_zone) is IMHO not immediately understandable,
this would be the better choice.
So, should we start vote on that proposal? Any other discussion needed?
. ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the talk