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

Graeme Fitzpatrick graemefitz1 at gmail.com
Fri Jan 18 21:43:34 UTC 2019

On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 05:49, Markus <selfishseahorse at gmail.com> wrote:

> I've updated the proposal [1],

Good work, Markus

A couple of thoughts ...

Both natural=cape and natural=peninsula can be part of a natural=peninsula
,  comes out a bit awkwardly. Maybe just leave it as "A n=c can be part of
a n=p", but a n=p cannot be part of a n=c"?

> Regarding areas with fuzzy boundaries,

I'd be inclined to do what other mappers have already done in those
examples I posted the other day - follow the (verifiable) coastline, then
just draw an arbitrary straight line across the base of the area.

>From my reading, a peninsula / cape / headland / spit etc doesn't actually
have a base or inland border - it is just the name given to that bit of
land sticking out into the sea, so it would seem to only be OSM that is
worried about where it starts.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190119/d7844d8c/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list