On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Niccolo Rigacci <o...@rigacci.org> wrote: > For bikers - at least in Italy Alps and Appennini mountains - a > mountain pass along a road is often used as a meeting point or as > a trip destination. So the use of place=locality is not so > misleading.
Yep, I was thinking something similar. Sometimes a pass is a genuine location/township (eg, Charlotte's Pass ski resort). Sometimes it's just a mountain pass of no renown. Sometimes the situation is much muddier, like Arthur's Pass in New Zealand, which is both a mountain pass (of significant renown), a nearby township, and a national park. Regarding ULFL's suggestions: >a) We might want to improve rendering of mountain_pass=yes to appear in lower >zoomlevels (e.g. z14 on both default mapnik / osmarender maps) But we don't necessarily want every mountain pass to appear equally prominently. >b) We might want to discourage the use of place=locality to "enforce" >rendering of otherwise "well known tags" that has "low render priority" Yes, if there was a better way for the tagger to communicate that this mountain pass is particularly worthy of viewing at lower zoom levels So, c) continue the importance=* debate, and suggest people use importance=* rather than locality=* for some instances (and continue to use locality=* where appropriate) Steve _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk