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

Graeme Fitzpatrick graemefitz1 at gmail.com
Fri Jan 18 23:22:27 UTC 2019


On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 09:09, Markus <selfishseahorse at gmail.com> wrote:

> It certainly can be phrased better (this isn't my strong point), but i
> wanted to make it clear that a peninsula can also be part of a bigger
> peninsula.
>

OK, how about "A natural=cape can be part of a natural=peninsula, a
natural=peninsula
can be part of a larger natural=peninsula, but a natural=peninsula cannot
be part of a natural=cape"?

I've updated the proposal accordingly.
>

Good, thanks, but that also raises an awkward (& unanswerable?) question
about "Please do not map very large peninsulas like subcontinents as
multipolygons as they strain the servers too much and are hard to maintain"?

How big is "too much strain" & who can say it's straining too much?

Is Cape York Peninsula OK, but Italy too big?

How can anybody tell?

BTW I'm in no way complaining or objecting to the idea (I'll be voting for
it when it get's there!), it's just the question of the technical
limitations that may be involved?

Thanks

Graeme
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190119/cb943899/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list