[Tagging] Topographic Prominence for Peaks
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Mon Sep 24 06:03:54 UTC 2018
Right! Especially on my island, New Guinea.
That’s why we need to check the height of saddles and peaks “by hand”, or
better yet by survey with GPS.
OSM is the right place for this data, and some map styles and database
users will find it useful to analyze data about mountain areas and peaks.
For example, even those lists of “tallest peaks” actually use topographic
prominence as a cutoff. Otherwise the highest peaks on Earth would all be
rocks and bumps on the slopes of Everest.
Most of us just estimate the prominence of a peak intuitively, before
choosing to add one to the map. Clearly, a 5 meter tall bump isn’t a peak.
Perhaps a 10 meter rise may have a name in England or Denmark, where
mountains are scare. In other contexts a peak won’t be named unless it is
100m or 200m above the nearest saddle on a ridge.
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 12:59 PM Yves <yvecai at mailbox.org> wrote:
> I don't see no issue in mapping prominence for those interested in.
> Just to mention for the sake of the discussion that 'sufficiently accurate
> DEM' doesn't exists globally.
> Yves _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging