> On Mar 22, 2016, at 5:32 AM, Janko Mihelić <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> You actually already have all the data you need, and it's on Wikidata. Just
> look at the number of articles about each peak, and render them according to
> that. More articles=rendered at lower zooms. Problem solved, and you don't
> have to put vague tags in OSM.
this might be a good solution for ordering the mountains at a national or
international level.
but It doesn’t work very well (probably at all) for provincial level, unless
all mountains except for the ones on the wikidata get rendered in at Z15.
This means we have to have all regionally important mountains in wikidata.
On the lower end, we also need something for filtering out lumps - the little
named hills or tiny sub-peaks.
Where I Lived in San Diego, the flat places all had names (mesas, bluffs, etc),
and the large mountains all had names - but it was easy to deal with, as they
were all rather large.
Here in rural Japan, the mountains are a never-ending collection of steep,
jagged, odd shaped hills and little tiny lumps rising from the long sloping
sides of dead volcanos (they are the tops of buried mountains). and every
lump, every bump, and every collection of bumps has a name. I have seen the
local hand drawn map for my area, and the the level of naming detail is a
magnitude greater than what I saw in the US.
it’s like what if every road lane had a name, and then the road had a different
name. it is just so many names for such tiny things - but OSM only supported
naming roads.
Javbw
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
