Exposure for the highlights otherwise you lose them. This is a typical situation with a landscape with a sky in it which, with film, we'd use ND grads to sort out. Now, a better alternative is to take two exposures and blend them in post. I often stitch landscapes with multi-rows of variable exposure so each frame is well exposed. Dynamic range never really becomes an issue then.
Yes, Mark, but stitching is something pretty specialised (or is to me!) and not a useful in-the-field sort of way out of a problem. I suppose that blending in PS is also a bit of an added problem, and I, for one, would far rather find the single-shot ideal. Obviously, if computer time is part of the pleasure, that's something else and I understand that might be the case.
I think the 'reasonable' thing is to do as with tranny: decide which highlight area is most important and base exposure on that.
I believe that the more interesting landscapes that I see are interesting, very often, precisely because of the sky/cloud look they happen to have rather than because of the solid matter. In reality, our own eyes often hide shadow detail to reveal the wonders of the firmament to greater advantage i.e. contre jour work.
Rob C