> On Sep 25, 2018, at 12:14 PM, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I live in country with long ridges, and almost anything with enough isolation 
> and a little bit of prominence winds up being a named summit.

Yea, long strings of peaks are difficult to deal with.

A caldera relation would handle a single volcano with many named peaks, such as 
Mt Akagi - they look like an alligator floating in a pond. 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/23360789861/in/album-72157638113676925/

Sometimes, depending on the angle, they appear as a range, but it when viewing 
from above, their circular nature is present. 

The big blue mountain ridges are circular volcanoes (Mt Haruna) and collaped 
volcanoes (Mt Miyogi). 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/6752512409/in/album-72157638113676925/

But making a relation to handle your example is very difficult, similar to the 
many long, layered mountain ranges made by tectonic action in Japan. 

I don't know how to handle such things. 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/11091212455/in/album-72157638113676925/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/6752512409/in/album-72157638113676925/

Also, Japan is very young geologically, and the extreme erosion from the rain 
has brought several square KM of soil down into the valleys (along with 
quarantary volcanic eruptions) , making soft hills that stick up everywhere. 
Every lump has a name, and even little lumps on lumps have names. 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/javbw/11091304694/in/album-72157638113676925/

Each of these situations: 

- calderas and very large peaks with named features 
- ranges and ridges of jumbled random peaks 
- lumpy hills and "mountains" on flat/gently sloping  terrain 

Might require a unique approach. 

=Peak is unsuited to handle all three, and simply using ele or a prominence 
score probably can't either. Both are important components, though. 

I agree it will only be mapped correctly via the opinion of local/regional 
mappers - but having them "tune" or "adjust" the values after a programaticaly 
generated solution might be best - however I have no idea how that might be 
done. 

Until then, giving mappers the tools to denote "importance" to mountains the 
same way we do for roads (track to trunk) and waterways (ditch to river) is the 
only viable way forward. 

Javbw. 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to