Range: another aspect of piece activity?

Update 3/6/07: Maybe I won't include range as another factor. While it is important, it can really be subsumed under mobility, in particular, the important proviso in mobility that you should aim for mobility in important parts of the board. The ability to gain such mobility can depend on piece range, but perhaps range doesn't deserve its own category...

Reading through Soltis' book Rethinking the chess pieces, I learned another aspect of piece activity that I didn't include in my previous list: range, or the distance a piece can travel on the board. This is different from mobility. A bishop. knight, and king might be able to move to eight squares in a given position (mobility), but the range of the bishop is much greater. Perhaps that's why they call the bishop a long-range piece :)

Soltis points out that in certain types of positions you should favor one type of piece over the other. For instance, in endgames where there is pawn action on both wings, the bishop should often be favored over the knight. If all the action is on one side of the board, then the knight should often be favored because it is not limited to one color.

Now my analysis of piece activity yields four different subdimensions:
1) Mobility (number of squares the piece can move to, especially important squares where threats are possible).
2) Freedom (number of squares to which a piece can move while carrying out its essential defensive roles).
3) Range (distance a piece can move across the board).
4) Coordination (multiple pieces working together toward a common goal).

Have I missed anything?

If only I were good enough with tactics to be able to really focus on all these cool positional ideas. Unfortunately, my biggest problem is still losing material. Since an inactive bishop is usually better than being down a bishop, I still need to focus on tactics!