[Tagging] tagging a point of interest of sorts

M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Mon Jan 3 15:53:05 GMT 2011

2010/12/16 Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Richard Welty <rwelty at averillpark.net> wrote:
>> it depends on what an attraction is. i'm not averse to using it, but in the
>> US at least, an attraction is usually some place you park, maybe buy
>> tickets, and go in a building, park, etc for a more extended experience.
> Yeah, but don't go thinking that every cultural stereotype surrounding
> the word "attraction" has to apply to a tag of the same name.
> Btw, historic=yes is another candidate. Of the existing tags, that
> might be the best actually.

IMHO those could both (the highway-marker and the dog) be tagged as
landmarks. Both of them do IMHO not qualify for artwork and at least
the marker is surely not an attraction (I guess also the dog is not
really a tourist attraction, but this should be judged upon with local

I found this page about landmarks, which seems to see landmarks only
as stuff related to navigation on the water (I would ignore this or
better amend the page):


More information about the Tagging mailing list