You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The rendering of cities and towns at Zoom<11 strongly depends on their population. That's ok in Europe, where most place=* have a mapped population. It leads to sparse labeled map in other regions, where are only small towns or towns without population=*
For example I would like to see Padum (town,p=null) and Leh (city,capital=5,p=5000)(*) in this area, and also in Europe there would be enough space to show Landeck (town,p=7336) or Corte (town,p=6915) in the map.
Maybe it is a good idea to have an additional field in lowzoom_cities with something like "most important place in a area of N kilometers" (and to interpret it as "we have M pixel space for useful labels").
Max
(*) Wikipedia says "population=30870". Maybe we also have a problem with the reliability of our data ;)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The rendering of cities and towns at Zoom<11 strongly depends on their population. That's ok in Europe, where most place=* have a mapped population. It leads to sparse labeled map in other regions, where are only small towns or towns without population=*
For example I would like to see Padum (town,p=null) and Leh (city,capital=5,p=5000)(*) in this area, and also in Europe there would be enough space to show Landeck (town,p=7336) or Corte (town,p=6915) in the map.
Maybe it is a good idea to have an additional field in lowzoom_cities with something like "most important place in a area of N kilometers" (and to interpret it as "we have M pixel space for useful labels").
Max
(*) Wikipedia says "population=30870". Maybe we also have a problem with the reliability of our data ;)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: