On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:49 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 15 June 2010 13:33, Zeke Farwell <ezeki...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Steve, >> I like this as a possible solution as well. Perhaps the admin_level tag >> could be used? Same as for boundaries. The challenges in my eyes are not >> making the tagging scheme overly complicated, and making if verifiable based >> on physical characteristics. In my opinion OSM only needs three levels max, >> and maybe two would do it. > > so to avoid naming confusion you could do... > > aerodrome=major > aerodrome=minor > aerodrome=small
I can't see any benefit in using words to describe what is essentially a numeric scale. Again, issues with connotation: "What do you mean, X isn't 'major'" - it's different to, "What do you mean, X isn't 4 out of 5"? Having to re-define ordinary English words sucks. While 3 levels might be enough currently, it might also be better to leave room for more levels. Perhaps make it a scale out of 10, with only numbers 3, 5 and 7 used at the moment. Btw don't forget that on certain render styles, the levels at which stuff appear will be totally different: public transport maps, air traffic maps, military maps... Steve _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
