[Tagging] Feature Proposal – RFC – natural=peninsula (Was: Feature Proposal – RFC – place=peninsula)

[Christoph Hormann]

On Friday 18 January 2019, Markus wrote:
> [...]particularly the
> distinction from natural=cape. natural=peninsula now includes a
> minimal area limit of 1 km².

That is a very bad idea on two accounts:

* it would to my knowledge be a first in the whole OSM tagging system 
that defines a tag through an arbitrary numerical limit.  And a 
pointless limit i would like to add because any data user who wants to 
filter for peninsulas larger than one square kilometer could do so just 
as well (or with as much difficulty) as the mapper.

* it would dilute the meaning of natural=cape from its current very 
narrow meaning to one of "what natural=cape currently means plus small 
peninsulas" which would not only be counterproductive for data quality, 
it would also be completely counter-intuitive for the mapper (tagging a 
cape and a 0.9 km^2 peninsula the same but tagging a 0.9 km^2 peninsula 
and a 1.1 km^2 peninsula differently)

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/