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

[Christoph Hormann]

On Friday 18 January 2019, Paul Allen wrote:
> > * it would to my knowledge be a first in the whole OSM tagging
> > system that defines a tag through an arbitrary numerical limit.
>
> place=islet and place=island.  Islets are smaller than 1 km², islands
> are larger than 1 km².

I stand corrected.

If you look at the size distribution of features with those tags you 
will see that the distinction between place=islet and place=island does 
not have any practical meaning in the data.

In other words:  If you want natural=cape and natural=peninsula to be 
synonyms for natural=cape_or_peninsula and don't mind flushing >11k 
existing natural=cape features with a well defined meaning which are 
not peninsulas down the drain such a limit could help accomplishing 
that.

> place=hamlet, typically less than 100-200 inhabitants.
>
> place=village, typically 1,000-10,000 inhabitants.

Where is the numerical limit in there?

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