On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:02 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> wrote: >(I know, don't tag for the renderers
Can we just ban that ridiculous, misquoted and harmful commandment? Taking into account renderer support for current and proposed tags is perfectly appropriate. > A finer and more granular/elaborate distinction could still be applied > (later or in custom renderings), but this would at least help to > identify the well known and most important ones (in which people are > usually interested when flying with an airline instead with their own > private jet). I'm not in favour of splitting aerodrome into aerodrome and airport if it doesn't scale to further divisions. It just introduces another English word which will cause more quibbles about what aerodrome is vs what an airport is. Then we'll want to split hairs over airfields, and intercontinental airports - whereas the semantics of all those things are totally irrelevant. Just solve the problem once and for all: aeroway=aerodrome importance=5 And the best part is, if this takes off, we can apply it to the next one of these...because this problem is hardly unique to airports. And it lends itself very well to letting local mapping communities define their own standards in ways that aren't counterintuitive. Would you really want to see the only airfield in the whole country mapped as "aeroway=intercontinental_airport"? No...but "importance=9" is a lot less jarring. Steve _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
