[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC -Funeral hall

Jarek Piórkowski jarek at piorkowski.ca
Wed Aug 19 16:25:10 UTC 2020

On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 11:58, Joseph Eisenberg
<joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> On 19. Aug 2020, at 15:33, wolle68 at posteo.de wrote:
>> >> I could imagine rare cases of a privately run cemetery not linked to
>> >> any religion or belief/life stance and where there is such a building.
>> >> But typically, they would be public.
>> >
>> > let me rephrase my question: how important is it that the facility is
>> > “public”?
>> > IMHO this feature should have a functional definition only, everything
>> > else depends on the context and is not really relevant.
> In the US, there are privately owned cemeteries, often with a private funeral home / mortuary building on the site. You can buy a plot and also pay for the funeral services, including the use of a hall for a viewing, reception or funeral service (religious or otherwise).

Just to clarify, where "public" and "private" are being discussed
here, is the important consideration private/public ownership, or
private/public right to burial (possibly at a fee?). As I understand
it, most American cemeteries would be privately owned but open to
everyone, but there might perhaps be some religious groups operating
their own burial locations. That assumption of public access might not
traditionally be the case for e.g. European Catholic cemeteries, which
are distinguished from "public" or "communal" cemeteries which accept
burials of non-Catholics.


More information about the Tagging mailing list