[Tagging] natural=ridge vs natural=arete

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at gmail.com
Thu Nov 6 07:46:51 UTC 2014

"where you want renderers to display arete signatures" - Tagging for
 is a poor idea.

Anyway, way would be splitted both with [natural=arete] and [natural=ridge;

2014-11-06 7:02 GMT+01:00 Friedrich Volkmann <bsd at volki.at>:

> On 05.11.2014 12:23, Richard Z. wrote:
> > Another reason I don't like current arete/ridge state is that some
> ridges are
> > very long - and they may be partially arete and ridge in different
> segments.
> > Having a way that is tagged partially as natural=ridge and partially as
> > natural=arete seems like a bad idea.
> Subtags make it even worse, because they require to split the way a couple
> of times. Most renderers label every part separately; and whenever someone
> searches for the ridge name, Nominatim will deliver multiple parts instead
> of the whole ridge.
> Therefore, it's better to tag the name on one long way, and you may make it
> natural=ridge and add some additional and nameless natural=arete where you
> want renderers to display arete signatures (i.e. double sided cliffs).
> --
> Friedrich K. Volkmann       http://www.volki.at/
> Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20141106/39296cef/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list