<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 01/04/19 08:41, Andrew Harvey wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAD5VjsvZb7eASkJASB6NVwOronTA+jEHzLFaFQoL4T1oKK=2vw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 07:49, Graeme Fitzpatrick <<a
href="mailto:graemefitz1@gmail.com" moz-do-not-send="true">graemefitz1@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<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 dir="ltr"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"
class="gmail-m_4267118592545513011gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">Are you only tagging those sites
that are open & already advertised as
tourism sites?<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think that would be the safest way of doing it,
because they are considered sacred sites, so we should
be taking care to not show the location of things that
the local peoples may not want shown?</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
The ones I've seen mapped so far are well signposted and
marked out, widely accepted as public knowledge. </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yep. Only those sites that are commonly known have been mapped. <br>
<br>
Others, even some I know of and some with websites, are not on the
map nor commonly visited. <tt><br>
<br>
</tt>-----------------------<br>
I think my take is;<br>
<br>
<div>a rock engraving with no paint => site_type=petroglyph</div>
<div>a rock painting with no engraving => site_type=rock_painting<br>
<br>
Where it is both painted and engraved? site_type=rock_art <br>
<br>
???<br>
</div>
<tt></tt>
<p><tt><br>
</tt></p>
<p><tt></tt><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>