[Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

[Martijn van Exel]

Perhaps they should be tagged not as peaks then but as a place node (place=locality probably)?

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 10:23 AM, Mike Thompson <miketho16 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:29 AM Kevin Broderick <ktb at kevinbroderick.com <mailto:ktb at kevinbroderick.com>> wrote:
> 
> Would https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4992960980 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4992960980> be an example of (or very similar to) what you're talking about?     
> Yes, slightly different, but same general concept.  
> 
> 
> I've been told that one is a local reference point ("25 Short", ie. 25 feet short of 10k), and at least one article (https://rootsrated.com/stories/a-quick-and-dirty-guide-to-the-best-backcountry-skiing-in-jackson-hole <https://rootsrated.com/stories/a-quick-and-dirty-guide-to-the-best-backcountry-skiing-in-jackson-hole>) backs that up.
> I have seen back country trip reports mention such points (at least those that are high points), and they have *some* value therefore, but as I suggested earlier, "point n,nnn" is to me more of a description rather than a name in most cases.
> 
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20190308/7486b486/attachment-0001.html>