On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not bothered that these levels are numbers, it is just that the CURRENT > numbers do not allow for ALL of the levels as THIS list suggests. > > I still think there is a place for continents here rather than having to > create yet another set of numbers? Africa, Asia and the rest are USED to > provide administrative type grouping just as African Union and Asian Union do.
Problem is that they violate the nesting rule: countries can span multiple continents. Similarly continents are defined strictly by geographical features (where the land meets the sea) whereas country borders reach a distance into the sea, so they violate the covering idea also. I don't have any good ideas about how to do continents (and by extension the large oceans like Atlantic/Pacific/Indian/Southern/etc), but I don't think admin_level is the right place. I don't think a single country border runs along a continent border so you're not even saving space. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://svana.org/kleptog/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk