Talk:Proposed features/cape

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

"Other" geographic features are covered by place=locality already. This is ultimately just not necessary as it adds nothing that I can see to that tag. Circeus 05:57, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

The site place=locality sais: "The place=locality tag is useful for places that have a specific name, but do not necessarily have any geographic feature or population centre that could be used to attach a name tag to." But maybe this Proposal isto shorthanded - right now I stumbled upon Proposed_features/Geographical_Places. Though it isn't approved I'll have to have a closer look there. --Malenki 13:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
What this mean is that unlike a river, park or forest, these features do not have a traceable or otherwise obvious element (such as a building of set of streets) that can be used as an anchor. You cannot just randomly subdivide a lake to name a bay! A cape is just the land equivalent to a bay. Cf. [1]. Circeus 16:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
So as natural=bay is part of Map Features, it would be logical to have the land-based equivalent for capturing names. place=locality is certainly an option and could still be used in parallel or where there is classification doubt. But there are hundreds of thousands of capes, heads, peninsulas and (water) promontories so an exclusive category is useful and clearly definable in different languages and cultures. I support this proposal and use the tag already. MikeCollinson 10:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I support the proposal for the same reason as mentionned above. The name of capes should be rendered different to localities, starting at zoom level 10 and with a size as big as cities.--Federico Explorador 18:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)