[Tagging] Roman roads - was Re: "part:wikidata=*" tag proposal for multiple elements connected to the same wikidata id

[Janko Mihelić]

I think it's enough for a road to have a roughly similar route to be called
a Roman road.

I think the tag historic=roman_road or historic=road should at least
resemble something historic. If only the route is historic, then adding
something like historic=route to the type=route relation might be better.


On Sat, Sep 14, 2019, 20:22 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 13. Sep 2019, at 19:42, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > BTW, a better way for marking Roman roads would be to use
> historic=roman_road.  It's a
> > lapsed proposal, and doesn't show even on lutz's historic places map,
> but it would allow
> > a simple overpass-turbo query and might even let you map them with uMap
> (going by
> > the amount of data in just one Roman road, that's probably
> impracticable, though).  It's
> > been used 2000 times, so you could probably use it without a formal
> proposal.
>
>
> yes, or historic=road with historic:civilization=ancient_roman
>
> I’ve used both variants in the past but just had a second thought: is this
> about roads that are still with the original paving or also applicable to
> roads that were built by the romans but now have different paving (and
> maybe are wider, and maybe even left the original position for small parts)?
>
>
> Cheers Martin
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190914/ebee8b04/attachment.html>