[Tagging] How to put a name tag on an area with more than one type?

Sun Dec 13 18:58:43 UTC 2020

Do you have a suggestion of how to map Sweden's highest mountain, 
Kebnekaise?

The mountain is called Kebnekaise, it has two peaks, one is called 
"Sydtoppen" ("the south peak"), the other "Nordtoppen" ("the north 
peak").

Currently it's mapped with the two peaks where one is called "Kebnekaise 
Sydtoppen" and the other "Kebnekaise Nordtoppen". Not really correct, 
but perhaps the least bad way to do it? When zooming out, on a regular 
map you see the Kebnekaise name big over the mountain, but the names for 
Sydtoppen and Nordtoppen is removed. I'd love something like a 
possibility to put the peaks in a relation and put the mountain name in 
the relation in cases like this.

Kebnekaise is not the only example, it's quite common with Swedish 
mountain that the peaks themselves have quite anonymous names like those 
on Kebnekaise, "Stortoppen" (the great peak) is another common name of 
the highest peak on a Swedish mountain, where the mountain itself has a 
different (and unique) name. You don't want to see the anonymous 
"Stortoppen"-name when you zoom out the map. OSM-Carto has "solved" 
these name prominence issues by removing all names pretty much 
immediately, rendering overview maps useless.

One problem with the current peak tag is that the renderer has no 
information about the size of the mountain. A peak even if really high 
can be a small local peak on top of a large plateau.

(The mountain_range tag is a great tag, but I note that its status is 
just "in use", it's not an approved tag :-O.)

/Anders

On 2020-12-13 18:54, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

> 1) To tag a named "Torp" it sounds like there are several different 
> correct options, depending on what currently exists at the location.
> 
> If there is a single family home or a couple of homes used as 
> residences, it would be a place=isolated_dwelling mapped as a node at 
> the centre.
> 
> If it is still used as a farm, then place=farm can be used on a node 
> instead. This is treated as similar to place=isolated_dwelling by many 
> data users. It is also possible to map the area of the farmyard (around 
> the buildings) as landuse=farmyard and add the name to this feature, if 
> the name is only for the actual farm buildings and not for all the 
> surrounding areas.
> 
> For a named settlement with more than 2 families (but smaller than a 
> village), place=hamlet on a node would be appropriate. I'm not sure if 
> a torp is every that large?
> 
> If the torp is no longer inhabited, you can use a lifecycle tag to show 
> this: e.g. abandoned:place=farm or abandoned:place=isolated_dwelling or 
> abandoned:place=hamlet show that a former farm or small settlement are 
> now abandoned and no longer inhabited.
> 
> 2) For a mountain:
> Most mountains share a name with their highest peak, so natural=peak is 
> a great way to tag these.
> 
> But it's true that some "mountain" names are not the name of a peak. In 
> this case there are a couple other tags in use: natural=ridge is used 
> with a linear way which is drawn along the ridgeline. This works for 
> many named single ridges. 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dridge - example here: 
> https://www.opentopomap.org/#map=15/41.76382/-123.18038 - 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/631166206/#map=13/41.7664/-123.1567&layers=C
> 
> Sometimes a named "mountain" is not a single ridge but a whole range of 
> connected ridges. In this case we usually call it a "mountain range" in 
> English, and there is a somewhat uncommon tag for this 
> natural=mountain_range which I've used to map some ranges in my area. 
> This tag is harder to use. In some cases the best option is to use it 
> on a node at the center of the mountain range, in others it is possible 
> to use it on a linear way along the highest line of ridges at the 
> center of the mountain range. 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Anatural%3Dmountain_range - 
> example: 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/686647385#map=12/42.0515/-122.7575&layers=C
> While we can all disagree on how far down into the valley the mountain 
> extends, everyone agrees that the highest peak is part of the mountain, 
> so mapping peaks of a mountain as a node is 100% verifiably to be 
> correct. In some cases a linear way is also verifiable for a ridge or a 
> linear mountain range.
> 
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
> 
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 7:04 AM Ture Pålsson via Tagging 
> <tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> 
> 13 dec. 2020 kl. 15:21 skrev Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com>:
> 
> I'm probably misunderstanding this, but torp doesn't seem to be a type 
> of
> building.  The tag building=torp says that this building IS a torp (as
> opposed to a house, or a shop, or a garage, or a shed, or a barn).
> If you feel a need to indicate that a building was once part of a torp,
> building=torp isn't the way to do it.
> You're right; I was extremely sloppy with terminology there. A torp is 
> (or rather was) a small farm, usually either part of a bigger farm and 
> farmed by a tenant, paying rent to the bigger farm in the form of work, 
> or farmed by a soldier (paying rent by, well, being a soldier). Today, 
> most of them are either completely gone or used as summer houses, very 
> probably not with the original building.
> 
> I suppose what I wanted to say was:
> 
> * place=locality is used about all sorts of things, both inhabited and 
> uninhabited, and is pretty much useless.
> 
> * There are many places around Sweden (and probably the rest of the 
> world as well!) where there is just forest (or fields) today, that have 
> a name because they were, at some time, a torp (or some other kind of 
> settlement). To render these in "swedish topo-map style" (i.e, 
> italics), some sort of tagging is needed to say "this place has a name 
> because it used to be a farm/torp/whatever, but today there is nothing 
> here". (I suppose some would argue that these should not be in OSM at 
> all, because they are very hard to verify on the ground).
> 
> * There are also isolated dwellings, hamlets, villages, suburbs and 
> airport car parks (comparing old and present-day maps around 
> Stockholm-Arlanda airport is quite fun) whose names refer to long-gone 
> torps, but those can be tagged according to their present-day usage.
> 
> And I'd like to apologize to Anders for derailing this thread by 
> bringing up the subject at all! It was intended as an illustration of 
> the uselessness of locality, but I got a bit carried away. Trying to 
> render consistent maps from inconsistent OSM data does that to you. =)
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201213/bdeab9da/attachment.htm>