[Tagging] tagging for graves?

[Marc Gemis]

There is a little bit more information
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Historical_Objects/Karteneigenschaften,
which belongs to the geschichtskarte-map. I believe in their JOSM preset
there is also a section on graves.

regards

m

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Brad Neuhauser <brad.neuhauser at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks for the reply Martin, I'd seen you weighing in on this on the wiki.
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:47 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> 2014-09-30 18:04 GMT+02:00 Brad Neuhauser <brad.neuhauser at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I noticed a user adding some individual grave sites of "ordinary" people
>>> and am wondering what the recommended tagging is, if any. Here are some
>>> things I could find being used (are there others?):
>>>
>>>    - cemetery=grave [1] taginfo: 726 uses
>>>
>>>
>>
>> this seems bad tagging to me, because a grave is not a type of cemetery.
>>
>>
>>
> I agree--should there be a stronger statement against using this on the
> wiki page? (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:landuse%3Dcemetery)
> Or maybe send ceyockey a message?
>
>
>>
>>>    - grave=* [2] taginfo: 17 uses
>>>
>>>
>>
>> could be OK, what are the values?
>>
>>
>>
> For the little actual usage, it's mostly "grave=yes". There are many
> (maybe too many?) additional tagging values on the proposal page I linked
> to.
>
>
>>
>>>    - historic=tomb, tomb=* [3] taginfo: 3087 uses total, of which 1778
>>>    are tomb=tombstone (but the wiki notes this is only for "important or
>>>    well-known persons")
>>>
>>>
>>
>> IMHO you could use this for all kind of people, if the tagging makes
>> sense at all in this way. Not sure if "tomb" is a word suitable for an
>> ordinary grave, I have originally introduced this tag for more significant
>> structures like tumuli in etruscan necropoles or rock-cut tombs or
>> columbariums or mausoleums or pyramids. "tomb=tombstone" might also be
>> strange tagging because a "tombstone" is not a subtype of a tomb, or is it?
>> Someone has added this to the tomb page but without further notice on the
>> mailing lists. If tomb is a suitable term, I think the value should be
>> something like "ordinary_grave" or "grave" and not "tombstone" which is
>> really a part of a tomb/grave and not a type of tomb itself.
>>
>> Tomb sounds a little odd in English for a regular grave. But, clearly
> people are searching for something to use.
>
>
> I did some looking via overpass for the three tag schemes I mentioned
> above, and even for the first two (cemetery=grave and grave=*) most graves
> seem to be well-known figures, with many of them also tagged historic=*.
> So, it doesn't help much to get at what to do for the grave of an "ordinary
> person".
>
> The vast majority of grave tags seem to be in Germany. Has there been any
> sort of discussion of this on the DE list?
>
> Thanks,
> Brad
>
> cheers,
>> Martin
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20141001/57a4441a/attachment.html>