Proposal talk:Tag:natural=isthmus

natural=isthmus and man_made=embankment

Resolved: A clarification has been added to the proposal. –SelfishSeahorse (talk) 08:55, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

is it clear when we have a natural=isthmus or a man_made=embankment like [1]? May it happen that there is a combination of natural und man_made? Please add something how to distinguish the both.--Hfst (talk) 17:21, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. I've added a note that an isthmus is a natural feature and therefore this tag is not intended for embankments. Is this clear enough? I've also added your example, although it uses man_made=embankment on an area despite man_made=embankment is only defined on ways. Regards, –SelfishSeahorse (talk) 20:25, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

you wrote

... is not intended to be used for 'named' embankments ...

why named?? Or did you mean 'man made'?--Hfst (talk) 17:55, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

natural=isthmus is also not intended to be used for unnamed embankments. The attribute 'named' actually is superfluous. (Unfortunately, i cannot correct it, as the vote has already started. But i'll leave it out on the final wiki page.) –SelfishSeahorse (talk) 18:27, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

what about isthmus without name?

The tag natural=isthmus is used to tag a named isthmus: a narrow strip of land, bordered by water on both sides and connecting two larger land masses. --Hfst (talk) 17:55, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Why would we tag an isthmus without a name? There is no point in doing so, only the name makes this a feature. There are infinite places in all scales, where you could see an isthmus. This is about mapping a cultural feature (only because mankind gave a name to the thing it becomes actually a thing). What about place=locality without a name, would that make sense to you? --Dieterdreist (talk) 18:10, 18 February 2019 (UTC)