> On Mar 19, 2016, at 9:18 PM, Andy Mabbett <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's nowhere near as ridiculous as trying to render them according to > some arbitrary and subjective "importance" (Importance to whom?
All of the examples I have given are all sourced in local culture. Usually having things named after it, noted on road signs, depicted in paintings, noted in historical documents, included in historic lists (of famous peaks), and other *easily understood* things that provincial or regional people would be able to define - but be extremely difficult for a person who doesn't live in the country or region (or speak the language) to verify. Is someone supposed to make a "importance" database, detailing the hundreds or thousands of references that a mountain's name is used in - or can some local mappers just tag it to influence the renderings below z15 so it doesn't look like a useless jumble of unordered garbage labels? I think it is very obvious to people here that giving an icon and label to all of the little points on the lip of the crater of Mt Fuji the same rendering priority as the entire volcano of Mt Fuji is wrong. I also think it is obvious that rendering an icon for a 25m AGL hill in a city park with the same icon and labeling as a 2500m mountain is wrong. Doing nothing to rectify the situation - and using an argument against subjective data - when so many other types of data in OSM are ranked and rendered with subjective, but verifiable by locals - seems obtuse, and produces a objectively and unarguably inferior map. Javbw _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
