I don't actually mind 'natural=peak' for any named local maximum elevation. 'Peak' in one of its senses simply means the high or most important point of anything. You can speak of the peak of a hill, or of the peak elevation in a region, or talk of a mountain that has several peaks.
I wouldn't like using 'mountain' to mean 'hill', but 'peak' is more generic. I'm also fine with 'hill' if people want to use it. But as I said, the difference between 'mountain' and 'hill' is a matter of local culture. On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 9:19 AM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > > On 25. Sep 2018, at 02:15, Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > The page for natural=peak lists natural=hill as a tagging error: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=peak > > > > It should better reference the hill proposal as “see also”. While there is > likely discussion to be held about hills, simply calling it an ‘error’ is not > productive. > > > While this “possible tagging errors” section has some sense in pointing out > typical spelling errors and expected low usage synonyms, I find it more often > than I’d like, overshooting the mark by discouraging new tagging ideas and > dismissing tags with (at least slightly) different semantics. > Please look at these and remove tags from this section when you feel they are > not actually “tagging errors”. > > Cheers, > Martin > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
