<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Joseph Eisenberg,</div><div><br></div><div>The way I see it, this tag is not entirely subjective, but its rules have not been yet developed. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that you can tag a building with this tag either if it's older than 1850 or, in case it is newer than that date, if it has been inhabited by someone famous, if it has hosted a major event such as the signature of an international treaty or any other similar conditions that can be verified. The problem, above all, is that determining an objective use for this tag would lead to byzantine discussions such as many that we see around here and in the end nothing would be done. So this will remain a gray area forever and ever. Instead of that, we can all admit that historic cemeteries do exist and trust in the good sense of local mappers, as I mentioned earlier. It is always possible to find an exact definition for historic at a later stage and make the necessary amendments.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Dear Paul Allen,</div><div><br></div><div>The advantage of having a classification of history objects instead of just adding history=yes is that it creates a very valuable database that can be easily visualized for anyone with interest on the matter. I don't know why someone would be so invested against something like that. Nobody forces you to use tags if you don't see their use or care about the matter, but others may find it a perfect tool.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Best regards</div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">El jue, 11 feb 2021 a las 18:05, Joseph Eisenberg (<<a href="mailto:joseph.eisenberg@gmail.com">joseph.eisenberg@gmail.com</a>>) escribió:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Diego,<div><br></div><div>The problem with this tag is that it is subjective. You have not provided any verifiable, objective definition which can be used to determine if a cemetery from 1850 should be tagged as historic or not. </div><div><br></div><div>We don't map subjective information like restaurant ratings, and we don't map historical data which is no longer existing in the real world, like the site of an ancient battle which is now developed into a suburban residential estate. </div><div><br></div><div>The features under historic=* should have something real and current which is mappable, and it should be possible to visit the location and confirm that the tags are correct or incorrect.</div><div><br></div><div>Otherwise, enthusiastic mappers might add this tag to every churchyard and cemetery in their area which is older than 50 years, and that provides less information than start_date=* and is less verifiable. </div><div><br></div><div>-- Joseph Eisenberg</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:33 AM Diego Cruz <<a href="mailto:ginkarasu@gmail.com" target="_blank">ginkarasu@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Dear Martin Koppenhoefer,</div><div><br></div><div>When I said Baroque or Chopin, I was simply trying to put examples of reasons to consider a cemetery historic or not. Of course all the cemeteries you mention can have the tag historic=cemetery. If you want me to give you concrete examples instead, I think Recoleta Cemetery in Buenos Aires, Comillas Cemetery in Spain, Worms Jewish Cemetery in Germany or Père Lachaise Cemetery in Paris qualify for this tag, apart from those you mention. We can get lost in the details, but that doesn't mean that this tag isn't useful and applies to existing objects.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Dear Paul Allen,</div><div><br></div><div>I wouldn't put this tag to the first cemetery in a town myself, but local communities may think it fit to do so, because the concept of historic significance can be different according to the place. For example, I wouldn't use this tag much in my own area. Around here people used to be buried inside churches and the currently existing cemeteries are not older than 1850. <br></div><div>All the military cemeteries you mention qualify for this tag in my opinion too. I don't see what's the problem there. However, contrary to what you say, if there is a series of Baroque/Merovingian/Native American/whatever-period-you-like-with-historic-significance tombs it can be considered a historic ensemble and the whole can be mapped as historic, apart from the individual tombs.</div><div><br></div><div>Best regards</div><div>Diego Cruz<br></div></div><div dir="auto"></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">El jue., 11 feb. 2021 1:41, Daniel Capilla <<a href="mailto:dcapillae@gmail.com" target="_blank">dcapillae@gmail.com</a>> escribió:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Hello to all.</p>
<p>I also think it is important to map what is inside the cemetery,
not just the cemetery itself (the site). If the proposal is
approved, I plan to write an entry in my OSM diary explaining why
I have decided to make this proposal. I visited a historic
cemetery in my locality and was mapping some historic graves,
cenotaphs, memorials, columbaria... There is a lot of local
history in a historic cemetery.<br>
</p>
<p>Many historic cemeteries are included in a list of authorised
heritage registrers. Where I live, a medium-sized city in Spain,
there are two historic cemeteries and both are registered by a
competent heritage authority, one national and one regional.
However, in OSM this requirement is not mandatory for mapping a
historic feature, so I have left the question open and referred to
what the wiki explains about it.</p>
<p>Establishing the requirements for mapping a historic feature in
OSM goes beyond this proposal (and beyond my possibilities). This
proposal has a very limited scope in reality. I have modified the
draft to make it clearer. Any suggestions for improvement are
welcome.<br>
<br>
In a few days I hope to send the RFC. Thank you for your
cooperation and comments.<br>
</p>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Daniel<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>El 10/2/21 a las 23:50, Martin
Koppenhoefer escribió:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Am Mi., 10. Feb. 2021 um
00:10 Uhr schrieb Diego Cruz <<a href="mailto:ginkarasu@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">ginkarasu@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">Local users can easily verify if a
cemetery is historic or not. This is partly subjective,
but you need to trust local users' common sense, as in
any other tag.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"> Is there a series of Baroque tombs? It's
historic.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>so it is about age? When you say "baroque", do you mean
from the 17th/18th century, or would late 18th, 19th and
20th century "baroque" also qualify? The monumental cemetery
of Verano (Rome) would probably qualify, although it was
opened only in 1812 (while the baroque period ended around
1740) and most (?) of it is from the 20th century: <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Cimitero_del_Verano" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Cimitero_del_Verano</a>
(on the other hand, maybe this does not qualify, because
there is also a very old christian place of worship, Saint
Lawrence outside the Walls, from the 4th century AD, which
is even a Papal Basilica, and the proposal says: "Its scope
of application is limited to cemeteries in the sense in
which they are understood in OpenStreetMap: «places usually
independent of place of worship» and «not close to a place
of worship»"?)<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> I guess even younger cemeteries would qualify to be
"historic", for example world war I cemeteries like
Douaumont? <a href="https://www.verdun-douaumont.com/en/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.verdun-douaumont.com/en/</a></div>
<div>This seems an easy case, because it is also a kind of
historic=monument for the Verdun battle.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also this is probably a no-brainer, although people are
now living there (it is much older than baroque): <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_the_Dead_(Cairo)" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_the_Dead_(Cairo)</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Generally, I see a lot of overlap with archaeological
site for many historic burial places. All of them which are
older than a few hundred years will probably also qualify
for archaelogical site, and there are also already site
types established for it:</div>
<div><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:site_type" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:site_type</a>
in particular: necropolis<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Would the Gizeh site qualify for historic=cemetery? A
massgrave from the Bosnian war? <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"> Is it the last remaining Jewish cemetery
of a region? It's historic.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">I find it a bit difficult to make a
qualitative assessment based on how rare something is. If
locally there are many old jewish cemeteries, they would not
qualify, but if there is only one left, it would? I am not
very familiar with jewish tradition but I thought to remember
that their deads rest "forever" (or until salvation by the
Messiah) in their burial places, so the cemetery would remain
forever a cemetery, even if there are no new burials, not?<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div> </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"> Is Chopin buried there? It's historic.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>burial places of famous people are likely noteworthy, but
I am not sure the whole cemetery becomes historic because
Chopin is buried there - or Jim Morrison. (on a sidenote, no
doubt that Père Lachaise is a historic cemetery).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Not that I could not agree that many cemeteries, or even
most, according to the area you look at, are of historic
value. It's almost implicit, especially for every cemetery
older than a few decades and of significant size. Everybody
dies, also famous people, and rich people who can afford to
engage notable artists for the funeral monument, so it seems
logical that any cemetery in a bigger city will have some
famous people buried there.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>My recommendation would be to focus on mapping the things
that make the cemetery "historic", both in terms of
components (tombs etc.) but also regarding the attributes of
the whole site. E.g. for the age, when it is known, I would
recommend to add explicit reference to the start_date, it is
a datum that already tells more than any historic=yes or
cemetery qualifiers. If it is unknown, you could still add a
rough timespan. Additionally to a start date, it would be
interesting to have the "main period", because it may well
be the case that the cemetery was used for hundreds or even
thousands of years, but most of the current tombs are from a
much later time.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Cheers</div>
<div>Martin<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</blockquote></div>