[Tagging] Feature proposal - RFC - natural=ridge
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Nov 8 12:05:57 GMT 2011
2011/11/7 Dmitri Lebedev <siberia.accanto at gmail.com>:
> this is the page with the proposal:
> Just look at this picture:
> There are peaks that can be tagged properly (although it's technically
> possible to deduct them with some accuracy from elevation maps), but
> between them there are ridges, the top edges of the mountains.
I like this proposal, because it is truly important to have these
connections in a map (you will usually see them in the elevation
isolines, but they might have a name)
I am not sure for the wording though. Isn't this an edge? Maybe I am
confused, because wikipedia "told" me that a ridge would be a natural
feature (your proposal doesn't give any definition what a ridge is)
occuring at a _chain of mountains_ (but in the osm wiki you also speak
about hills) while for shorter places I found
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ar%C3%AAte (french words do IMHO not
really make sense) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spur_(topography),
"crest" and "edge" (could also be that interlanguage links are not
precise, I am mostly referring to the difference between
de:"Gebirgskamm" and de:"Grat").
Is this all the same? Shall we distinct between them?
I think due to the various words in use for features of this kind a
definition should be given and alternatives proposed for features that
are close but excluded by this definition.
More information about the Tagging