Am 08.07.2014 17:06, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > > 2014-07-08 15:59 GMT+02:00 Daniel Koć <dan...@xn--ko-wla.pl > <mailto:dan...@xn--ko-wla.pl>>: > > I just made the proposal page for discussion about enhancing > natural=peak tag: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/__wiki/Proposed_features/peak > <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/peak> > > This is my first attempt to define OSM features. > > > > I am not sure this is something we'd want in OSM for at least 2 reasons: > > 1. As you (and wikipedia) write, there is no clear distinction between > mountain and hill, so this is subjective (you write it in the proposal) > > 2. The analysis of the other peaks in the area and the topography in > general can be done automatically both, based on OSM data and on > additional elevation data (like from hgt rasters, Aster, SRTM, other > DEMs, etc.) > > So this is probably not something we'd have to map manually, as it could > be automatically derived. I agree that the current rendering is not > always optimal, but this could be resolved in the rendering system, no > need to do it in the base data. Or maybe I got you wrong?
If you really want to get some useful information in the data you could have a look at topographic prominence [1] and isolation [2] (german page is much better). Though, Martin is right that this information could be automatically calculated. Cheers fly _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
