<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2014-07-08 20:08 GMT+02:00 Daniel Koć <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:daniel@xn--ko-wla.pl" target="_blank">daniel@xn--ko-wla.pl</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
If I was to define peak now, I would start with "terrain=peak", and then add "descent=natural" or "descent=artificial" to narrow it down when needed.</blockquote></div><br><br>I agree, man_made=mound isn't a bad idea.<br>
<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I wouldn't question all peaks and require a subtag like descent=natural for what can and has in the past sufficiently been described with natual=peak. If there are a few mounds between the currently tagged objects, you can always retag those few, but retagging all peaks because there are some questionable ones between them is not a good idea (IMHO).<br>
<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">In my area there are similar (?) prehistoric objects (tumuli) which have been used as tombs by the Etruscans:<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerveteri#Necropolis_of_the_Banditaccia">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerveteri#Necropolis_of_the_Banditaccia</a><br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerveteri#mediaviewer/File:Banditaccia1.jpg">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerveteri#mediaviewer/File:Banditaccia1.jpg</a><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">(these are the most famous ones (Unesco world heritage), but you can also find them occassionally in other, less well known and mostly unvisited necropoles)<br>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I have tagged many of them with historic=tomb and tomb=tumulus (and eventually also with building=tumulus) but they can also be considered "mounds".<br>
<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">cheers,<br>Martin<br></div></div>