[Tagging] Vote / Opinion poll about history=event

Simone Saviolo simone.saviolo at gmail.com
Thu May 5 16:34:17 BST 2011

2011/5/5 John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>

> On 6 May 2011 01:09, Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com> wrote:
>  > Unless you are in New Zealand, you're unlikely to tag the same thing:
> > It's being used for a Maori fortress, see
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C4%81_%28M%C4%81ori%29
> That seems too specific, it should be a subset of historic=fort, and
> even then how many of these still actually have some kind of physical
> presence, which is the argument against tagging historically
> significant events.

Aren't we nitpicking? I've tagged remains of Roman cities whose "physical
presence" is arguable, but nonetheless those are places of historical
interest in that a Roman building or forum was there. I agree it'd be moot
to map Troy based on the supposed position, but for well-documented POIs we
shouldn't be discussing whether a fort is still a fort. After all, most
European castles aren't actually used as castles anymore.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20110505/2ecafa57/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list