On 1/3/11 9:51 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
Richard Welty<[email protected]> writes:
what i see a bit right now in the US are places where we have
a central node from one import and a boundary with the same
name from another, and as a result two names showing up.
it's mildly annoying.
That may be true but Kurt is right. For most towns in New England
there is a polygon for the boundary, and then a specific place, often an
intersection or a village green or a few streets that should properly be
labeled as a point.
If having a polygon with the name and a point with the name as a
"populated place" produces two names on the map, then the rendering is
arguably broken. It may be that if the town center point is in the map
view, the label should be put more or less there.
there is an underlying data problem. the boundaries and center points
are disconnected bits of data, and i would argue that it's not reasonable
to demand that the rendering engines figure that relationship out.
this is why i suggested adding a "centroid" tag to the boundary relations
as a way to convey the place that is by convention considered the
"center" of town. the existing gnis object for West Sand Lake, NY then
can be
placed in a boundary relation for West Sand Lake with a role of
"centroid". now the rendering engine can just see if there's a centroid and
use that, if not, it can compute its own. if it doesn't check for the
centroid
and computes its own anyway, that's really not particularly a failure, just
not as nice as it could have been.
richard
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
