Hi, I'm newly subscribed to the tagging list so I apologize if this has been discussed before. Didn't find it in the archives though. I'm working on an area of coastline made up of cliffs and beaches<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.94817&lon=-122.065787&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF>. There are many sections where the cliffs drop directly into the ocean and it seems logical to me that the coastline and the cliff should be represented as one single way where this is the case.
On the archived natural=cliff proposal discussion page<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcliff/Archive/Proposal> I found a reference to putting both values in the natural key separated by a semicolon (natural=coastline;cliff). I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere else though. I tried it and upon rendering the cliff did not show up in Mapnik. I couldn't test how Mapnik would handle the coastline since that is only updated every few weeks, but I don't want to risk breaking the coastline by adding the cliff value in there. Has anyone seen or used this combination in practice? Does it mess up the coastline rendering? Another thought I had was using a collection relation (proposal<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Collected_Ways>) both for the coastline and the cliff. Ways where the two coincide would be members of both relations and would inherit both values. I imagine neither one of these methods is going to be rendered fully in Mapnik yet. That's fine. I just don't want to break the basic coastline rendering. I know it's touchy and can make the slippy map look like hell when it goes wrong. Zeke -- Zeke Farwell Vermont, USA
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging