2011/11/8 Michael Krämer <ohr...@googlemail.com>: > I would consider both a ridge. But honestly my personal definition would be > to the German "Grat"...:-) To give a negative example, here something I > would not consider a ridge but either cliff or rock: > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/H%C3%B6rnleLochenstein.jpg
+1, it's all about age ;-), I'd tag the steep parts natural=cliff. > More seriously: > I would suggest to use "ridge" for the distinct feature. ... So basically a > ridge is a feature of one or two mountains only. not sure, from what I read a "ridge" can probably span between several mountains (or hills). it can also form a "crest"? As you wrote, you are thinking about a de:"Grat" for which I agree it does not extend over the summit of a mountain (while a "Kamm" will, it consists of several "Grat"). > I think we all agree, that a continental divide or the "Alpenhauptkamm" are > not ridges. They these large scale features will very likely contain many > ridges but also other features. well, "Haupt"kamm (main .....) does also imply sub-objects. We could make relations type=route, route=ridge (or mountain_ridge or mountain_range,....) containing each other. With relations we could also map similar geographic features like gorges without additional geometry: we put the adjacent cliffs in a relation, e.g. type=area, and tag the relation with natural=gorge, name=xy so you'd know that the feature is between these ways. cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
