Mountain_range relation

Hungerburg · 2022-11-26T21:36:11.751Z

Wiki Documention says:

natural=mountain_range is in use to tag a mountain range, a series of high ridges and mountain peaks ranged in a line and connected by high ground. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=mountain_range

This fits very well the so-called “Northchain” in my local area It is mapped as a series of ridges and aretes. I want to group them into a relation, so the Wikepdia Article can be linked once only, and a search for the term will only yield a single result.

There seems no relation type adequate though. Anybody aware of one?

Nielkrokodil · 2022-11-27T09:19:47.033Z

type=site could fit. But I’m afraid Nominatim would not find it.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation%3Asite
… to group several objects which together have a single identity as a whole but cannot be accurately described by other data types …

Alternative option: Draw a polygon (or multipolygon) around all of it. This would have the added value that everything inside (not just peaks, ridges etc) is known as “within Northchain”. Mountain range polygons are controversial because sometimes they are not perfectly verifiable. I have no knowledge of the “Northchain” to know if its possible to define a verifiable outer way or not.

Janjko · 2022-11-27T14:50:50.729Z

This was debated a lot of times. There is one more tagging strategy, put mountain_range:wikidata=Qxxxx on every natural element of that mountain. But the former two strategies are probably more mapper friendly.

Hungerburg · 2022-11-29T22:26:51.774Z

The site relation is in talks on nominatim issue tracker, c.f. Relations of type=site won't be found by Nominatim · Issue #463 · osm-search/Nominatim · GitHub - I already looked at that, but my editor instantly offers a preset, and the extra attributes presented there make this a very unlikely match.

Mountain-ranges are a common polygon mapping a bit to the south, in the Dolomites. Mountains there are not spaced in chains/sierras, like the Nordkette and others in the Karwendel, see e.g. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Blick_auf_Innsbruck_u_Hafelerkamm_v_Gletscherkapel.jpg

This seems to be a case, where theory from the wiki and common practise orthogonal? So going for a polygon? Will keep you posted

Hungerburg · 2022-12-03T18:10:14.260Z

Finally got around this, after splitting the mapped ridges into natural=ridge and natural=arete sections, to match what is there on the ground, and then just drawing a single way along all of them to carry the natural=mountain_range, name=, wikipedia=, &c tags.

I just could not get around to dream up a polygon, where the situation is such a good fit for what the documentation says. Nominatim now finds it too. There is not even duplication, just several overlapping but different entities.