Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Richard Welty]

On 9/8/17 9:34 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 9/8/17 7:08 AM, ael wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 03:31:37PM -0600, Mike Thompson wrote:
>>> User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
>>> 50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in feet)
>>> to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown Point
>>> 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the issue of
>>> elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name only"[3].
>>>
>>> Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?
>> +10 for elevation only in the ele tag.
>>
>> As surveying improves or plate tectonics changes, it would be ridiculous
>> to change the name rather than just the elevation.
> adding the elevation to the name tag makes life far more difficult for data
> consumers. don't do it.
to amplify my point, there is a universe of extant and potential data
consumers;
some consumers are humans looking at the map on the website, but other
consumers
are generating GPS maps or other automated things with software. adding
elevation
to the name is a symptom of tagging for the website.
we need to watch continuously for folks who are tagging in this manner, and
get across to them why it shouldn't be done this way.

richard
-- 

rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Kevin Kenny]

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Colin Smale  wrote:
> Does anyone have any idea whether the elevations, be they in feet or metres,
> are all respecting the wiki definition of being the height above MSL
> according to EGM96 (not sure what that would mean in landlocked areas) and
> NOT WGS84 or (strictly speaking) relative to local MSL?
>
> The wiki page for ele[1] says this:
>
> Elevation (height above sea level) of a point in metres. This is mainly
> intended for mountain peaks but could also be used for elevation of airport
> runways and many other objects. For OpenStreetMap, this value should be in
> meters above above mean sea level as defined by the EGM96 geoid model. This
> elevation is usually very close to national "above sea level" systems with
> differences < 1m. This is not the height above the WGS84 ellipsoid (see
> Geoid) which is shown as raw elevation by some satellite navigation devices
> and which can differ from geoid elevation by up to 100m.
>
> If we can't even rely on the reference point for these elevations,
> discussions about feet vs. metres (assuming the unit is indicated properly)
> are close to "bikeshedding".

Note that in that definition it refers to the WGS84 ellipsoid, not the
WGS84 geoid. If WGS84 is implemented correctly, the ellipsoid is used
for horizontal control only and the geoid is used for vertical
control. Many widely available libraries, such as
https://geographiclib.sourceforge.io/, give reference implementations.
I would presume that modern GPS equipment - not bare receivers, but
the firmware and software surrounding them - gets it right. I
certainly haven't noticed, when using my smartphone, the 30 m
elevation difference that I'd see if it were relative to the reference
ellipsoid.

When I have tagged elevations, it's generally of places I've been.
Because I'm in North America, I've generally committed the small sin
of using NAVD88 or possibly a published elevation relative to NGVD29.
I tend to go with USGS surveyed elevations where they exist and my
altimeter doesn't show an egregious error - I presume that the
trigonometric elevations are more accurate than an altimeter. I don't
bother with orthometric reduction because in my area, the three
reference surfaces (NGVD29, NAVD88,  EGM96) concur to better than my
altimeter's resolution, to say nothing of its repeatability.
NAVD88-NGVD29 around here is typically less than a metre. I reset my
altimeter at either a benchmark or a tabulated spot elevation several
times a day if I'm doing elevations, particularly if the weather is
varying. Even my smartphone has a barometer, but ordinarily I carry a
separate altimeter.

Not perfect, but to do better in the field I'd need better instruments
than I carry, or even own. I don't do that sort of work unless you pay
me to do it, and if you offer to pay me, I'll happily give you the
business card of a licensed surveyor.

I tag measurements in SI units because that's the only thing that I
know all the tools can handle.

(Memo to self - still need to repair those misplaced Catskill peaks.
Too much to do, too little time...)

I think the only takeaway from all this is "don't use the reference
ellipsoid for vertical control." But my understanding is  that most of
us will get it right without realizing it, because our software does
it for us. Even more important is "don't use a GPS-only reference for
elevation unless you understand dilution of position." GPS-derived
elevations are pretty wonky. (But see above: even my smartphone has a
barometer.)

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[John F. Eldredge]

Also, I doubt anyone in ordinary life refers to a mountain as "Mount 
So-and-So 2000 meters", rather than simply "Mount So-and-So".



On September 8, 2017 8:36:52 AM Richard Welty  wrote:


On 9/8/17 7:08 AM, ael wrote:

On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 03:31:37PM -0600, Mike Thompson wrote:

User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in feet)
to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown Point
11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the issue of
elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name only"[3].

Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?

+10 for elevation only in the ele tag.

As surveying improves or plate tectonics changes, it would be ridiculous
to change the name rather than just the elevation.

adding the elevation to the name tag makes life far more difficult for data
consumers. don't do it.

richard

--
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Richard Welty]

On 9/8/17 7:08 AM, ael wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 03:31:37PM -0600, Mike Thompson wrote:
>> User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
>> 50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in feet)
>> to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown Point
>> 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the issue of
>> elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name only"[3].
>>
>> Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?
> +10 for elevation only in the ele tag.
>
> As surveying improves or plate tectonics changes, it would be ridiculous
> to change the name rather than just the elevation.
adding the elevation to the name tag makes life far more difficult for data
consumers. don't do it.

richard

-- 
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[ael]

On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 03:31:37PM -0600, Mike Thompson wrote:
> User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
> 50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in feet)
> to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown Point
> 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the issue of
> elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name only"[3].
> 
> Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?

+10 for elevation only in the ele tag.

As surveying improves or plate tectonics changes, it would be ridiculous
to change the name rather than just the elevation.

ael


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[marc marc]

Le 08. 09. 17 à 11:14, Janko Mihelić a écrit :
> 20155.9894568543 ft

your unreasonable example has nothing to do with elevation.
in any tag, nothing prevents a tool from being rational
in the values it saves or displays. I do not know what is
the best possible accuracy but an altitude measurement
rounded to 0.1 meter or 0.5 feet seems IMHO reasonable.
I have never seen a sign with more precise information.

you can even put a measure 10 times more accurate,
this will remain very far from your example but still
allowing to find a round number after conversion.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Janko Mihelić]

Elevation doesn't go in "name" tag, that's quite obvious. But I think
elevations in feet shouldn't be discouraged. Maybe sometimes you have
iconic elevations of mountains in feet everybody knows and learns in
school, and they want to see that number exactly on a map, and not some
fraction after converting from meters, like, Denali is 20155.9894568543 ft
high.

Janko

pet, 8. ruj 2017. u 10:57 Lukas Sommer  napisao je:

> The wiki page for https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele says it
> has to be in meters, not in feets.
>
> --
> Lukas Sommer
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Andy Townsend]

On 08/09/2017 09:54, Colin Smale wrote:


Does anyone have any idea whether the elevations, be they in feet or 
metres, are all respecting the wiki definition of being the height 
above MSL according to EGM96 (not sure what that would mean in 
landlocked areas) and NOT WGS84 or (strictly speaking) relative to 
local MSL?


Not without checking the provenance of the data in OSM, no.  At least in 
the UK, peak ele values will have come from a variety of sources:


o "Well known values" that "the height of mountain X is Y"

o Some value copied from some other (hopefully out of copyright) map

o A value read from a GPS or phone.  With a bit of luck that person 
might have calibrated the barometer in that device recently, but there's 
no guarantee.  A non-barometric GPS-only derived elevation is likely to 
be even worse.


In the UK where I am, there are a significant number of peaks added by 
one mapper based on spot heights from old OS maps - many of these are 
not actually peaks at all, and many aren't in the correct place.


Best Regards,
Andy


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Lukas Sommer]

The wiki page for https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele says it
has to be in meters, not in feets.

-- 
Lukas Sommer

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Colin Smale]

Does anyone have any idea whether the elevations, be they in feet or
metres, are all respecting the wiki definition of being the height above
MSL according to EGM96 (not sure what that would mean in landlocked
areas) and NOT WGS84 or (strictly speaking) relative to local MSL? 

The wiki page for ele[1] says this: 

ELEVATION (HEIGHT ABOVE SEA LEVEL) OF A POINT IN METRES. This is mainly
intended for mountain peaks [2] but could also be used for elevation of
airport runways and many other objects. For OpenStreetMap, this value
should be in meters above above mean sea level as defined by the EGM96
[3] geoid model. This elevation is usually very close to national "above
sea level" systems with differences < 1m. This is not the height above
the WGS84 ellipsoid (see Geoid [4]) which is shown as raw elevation by
some satellite navigation devices and which can differ from geoid
elevation by up to 100m. 

If we can't even rely on the reference point for these elevations,
discussions about feet vs. metres (assuming the unit is indicated
properly) are close to "bikeshedding". 

//colin 

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele

On 2017-09-08 10:39, Andrew Hain wrote:

> Or, indeed, you could put a conversion in the editor between the mapper 
> typing a figure in and the elevation being saved to the database.
> 
> --
> Andrew
> -
> 
> FROM: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
> SENT: 08 September 2017 02:59:39
> TO: tagging@openstreetmap.org
> SUBJECT: Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names 
> 
> On 08-Sep-17 09:10 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote: 
> 
>> Adding numeric values to the name of a peak is not okay. As for using feet 
>> in the "ele" tag instead of meters, JOSM discourages this practice and I 
>> think we should too. It's long past the time when Americans and other 
>> countries still using archaic and cumbersome measurement systems based on 
>> the length of the king's foot or thumb should embrace the metric system. The 
>> down side is that very peak I add involves an extra step.
> 
> Aviation still uses feet? 
> Asking a mapper who may not be familiar with conversion into meters leads to 
> errors. I'd rather have the render do the conversion as is done for other 
> dimensions. 
> 
> Cheers, 
> 
> Dave 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Jo  wrote:
> 
> ele can of course be in feett or lightyears for that matter, but it's a lot 
> easier to work with if they are all in the same unit. 
> 
> 2017-09-08 0:22 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
> On 08-Sep-17 07:39 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
> On 09/07/2017 04:31 PM, Mike Thompson wrote:
> User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
> 50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in
> feet) to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown
> Point 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the
> issue of elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name
> only"[3].
> 
> Could we get feedback from the wider community on this? That's what this is 
> for: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele [1]
> 
> The only catch is that it has to be in meters, so you would tag
> ele=3493.9 in your example.

+1 to name tag is name only.

--

ele tag should be used for this information.

And I would think that the ele value can be in feet just like other
dimensional units of width, height etc.

Should this be put as a new proposal? 

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [5] 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging [5]

  -- 

Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com [6] 

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 

Links:
--
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele
[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dpeak
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EGM96
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoid
[5] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[6] http://dswarthout.blogspot.com___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Andrew Hain]

Or, indeed, you could put a conversion in the editor between the mapper typing 
a figure in and the elevation being saved to the database.

--
Andrew

From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
Sent: 08 September 2017 02:59:39
To: tagging@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

On 08-Sep-17 09:10 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote:
Adding numeric values to the name of a peak is not okay. As for using feet in 
the "ele" tag instead of meters, JOSM discourages this practice and I think we 
should too. It's long past the time when Americans and other countries still 
using archaic and cumbersome measurement systems based on the length of the 
king's foot or thumb should embrace the metric system. The down side is that 
very peak I add involves an extra step.

Aviation still uses feet?
Asking a mapper who may not be familiar with conversion into meters leads to 
errors. I'd rather have the render do the conversion as is done for other 
dimensions.

Cheers,

Dave

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Jo 
> wrote:
ele can of course be in feett or lightyears for that matter, but it's a lot 
easier to work with if they are all in the same unit.

2017-09-08 0:22 GMT+02:00 Warin 
<61sundow...@gmail.com>:
On 08-Sep-17 07:39 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
On 09/07/2017 04:31 PM, Mike Thompson wrote:
User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in
feet) to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown
Point 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the
issue of elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name
only"[3].

Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?
That's what this is for: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele

The only catch is that it has to be in meters, so you would tag
ele=3493.9 in your example.


+1 to name tag is name only.


--

ele tag should be used for this information.

And I would think that the ele value can be in feet just like other dimensional 
units of width, height etc.

Should this be put as a new proposal?



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[marc marc]

Le 07. 09. 17 à 23:31, Mike Thompson a écrit :
> he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown Point 11,463 ft.
> it does say "Name is the name only"[3].

as the wiki says: the name is only the name.
"Crown Point 11,463 ft" is not a name.
Elevation goes in the "ele" tag.
in meters if it's only a number.
add ft if you want in feet
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Warin]

On 08-Sep-17 09:10 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote:
Adding numeric values to the name of a peak is not okay. As for using 
feet in the "ele" tag instead of meters, JOSM discourages this 
practice and I think we should too. It's long past the time when 
Americans and other countries still using archaic and cumbersome 
measurement systems based on the length of the king's foot or thumb 
should embrace the metric system. The down side is that very peak I 
add involves an extra step.


Aviation still uses feet?
Asking a mapper who may not be familiar with conversion into meters 
leads to errors. I'd rather have the render do the conversion as is done 
for other dimensions.


Cheers,

Dave

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Jo > wrote:


ele can of course be in feett or lightyears for that matter, but
it's a lot easier to work with if they are all in the same unit.

2017-09-08 0:22 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com
>:

On 08-Sep-17 07:39 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:

On 09/07/2017 04:31 PM, Mike Thompson wrote:

User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion
on changeset
50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of
mountain peaks (in
feet) to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown
Point" to "Crown
Point 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't
specifically address the
issue of elevation as part of a peak name, it does say
"Name is the name
only"[3].

Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?

That's what this is for:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele


The only catch is that it has to be in meters, so you
would tag
ele=3493.9 in your example.


+1 to name tag is name only.


--

ele tag should be used for this information.

And I would think that the ele value can be in feet just like
other dimensional units of width, height etc.

Should this be put as a new proposal?



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging





--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Dave Swarthout]

Adding numeric values to the name of a peak is not okay. As for using feet
in the "ele" tag instead of meters, JOSM discourages this practice and I
think we should too. It's long past the time when Americans and other
countries still using archaic and cumbersome measurement systems based on
the length of the king's foot or thumb should embrace the metric system.
The down side is that very peak I add involves an extra step.

Cheers,

Dave

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Jo  wrote:

> ele can of course be in feett or lightyears for that matter, but it's a
> lot easier to work with if they are all in the same unit.
>
> 2017-09-08 0:22 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:
>
>> On 08-Sep-17 07:39 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/07/2017 04:31 PM, Mike Thompson wrote:
>>>
 User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
 50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in
 feet) to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown
 Point 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the
 issue of elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name
 only"[3].

 Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?

>>> That's what this is for: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele
>>>
>>> The only catch is that it has to be in meters, so you would tag
>>> ele=3493.9 in your example.
>>>
>>>
>> +1 to name tag is name only.
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> ele tag should be used for this information.
>>
>> And I would think that the ele value can be in feet just like other
>> dimensional units of width, height etc.
>>
>> Should this be put as a new proposal?
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Jo]

ele can of course be in feett or lightyears for that matter, but it's a lot
easier to work with if they are all in the same unit.

2017-09-08 0:22 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:

> On 08-Sep-17 07:39 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
>
>> On 09/07/2017 04:31 PM, Mike Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
>>> 50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in
>>> feet) to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown
>>> Point 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the
>>> issue of elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name
>>> only"[3].
>>>
>>> Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?
>>>
>> That's what this is for: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele
>>
>> The only catch is that it has to be in meters, so you would tag
>> ele=3493.9 in your example.
>>
>>
> +1 to name tag is name only.
>
>
> --
>
> ele tag should be used for this information.
>
> And I would think that the ele value can be in feet just like other
> dimensional units of width, height etc.
>
> Should this be put as a new proposal?
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Warin]

On 08-Sep-17 07:39 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:

On 09/07/2017 04:31 PM, Mike Thompson wrote:

User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in
feet) to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown
Point 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the
issue of elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name
only"[3].

Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?

That's what this is for: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele

The only catch is that it has to be in meters, so you would tag
ele=3493.9 in your example.



+1 to name tag is name only.


--

ele tag should be used for this information.

And I would think that the ele value can be in feet just like other 
dimensional units of width, height etc.


Should this be put as a new proposal?


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 09/07/2017 04:31 PM, Mike Thompson wrote:
> User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
> 50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in
> feet) to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown
> Point 11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the
> issue of elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name
> only"[3].
> 
> Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?

That's what this is for: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele

The only catch is that it has to be in meters, so you would tag
ele=3493.9 in your example.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Tod Fitch]

Sounds like tagging for the renderer to me.

There is a elevation tag already defined and in wide spread use. And it is 
pretty easy for a renderer to show that in addition to the name. And even 
convert it from meters to feet when doing the rendering. I do this when 
rendering my personal use Topo maps.

Tod


On September 7, 2017 2:31:37 PM PDT, Mike Thompson  wrote:
>User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
>50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in
>feet)
>to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown Point
>11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the issue of
>elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name
>only"[3].
>
>Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mike
>
>
>[1]
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/50470413#map=13/40.6282/-105.6071=D
>[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/358911255/history
>[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Elevation in Feet as part of Peak Names

[Mike Thompson]

User Raymo853 and I are having a friendly discussion on changeset
50470413[1]. He has been adding the elevation of mountain peaks (in feet)
to the name tag. For example, he changed "Crown Point" to "Crown Point
11,463 ft."[2] While the wiki doesn't specifically address the issue of
elevation as part of a peak name, it does say "Name is the name only"[3].

Could we get feedback from the wider community on this?

Thanks,

Mike


[1]
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/50470413#map=13/40.6282/-105.6071=D
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/358911255/history
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging