[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - barrier:guard_stone

Volker Schmidt voschix at gmail.com
Wed Dec 9 17:36:14 UTC 2020


My apologies, wrong link!
The corner guard stone is here:
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/USu9htX8nw95mW77kSeZ7Q

Volker

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 23:40, Alan Mackie <aamackie at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 17:03, Volker Schmidt <voschix at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My gard stone example  on a building corne
>> <https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/YNhbgcyBHpYAhqatX0CwSF>is also useful
>> for this part of the discussion. I know the place well and I know the local
>> amateur history expert, and we talked about this specific stone, and also
>> asked about its historic value.
>>
> I'm sorry, I'm having trouble spotting it at that link, is it by the gate?
>
>> It is anywhere between 100 and a couple of hundred years old. It is on a
>> building the walls of which may have many hundreds of years. So it's
>> historical and as it's the only guard stone in that part of the city, it's
>> most likely also historic, not because in itself it is historic, but it's a
>> historical marker, as we are not good at keeping historic buildings of
>> minor importance.  The next building down the road, (which BTW may well be
>> of Roman origin as it used to lead straight to the historic city center of
>> Roman Patavium) was a tavern with several hundred years of confirmed
>> history, but was torn down about ten years ago to make place for a new
>> private house. So my personal opinion is that it is historic, even though
>> most likely 99% of the locals have never noticed it.
>>
>> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 15:15, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 09:56, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not saying that these stones should or not get a historic tag, but
>>>> surely it isn’t an argument that one of the OpenStreetMap based maps
>>>> highlights things based on a wildcard selection.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not an argument, merely a piece of evidence to consider.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If this tag would pose a problem for their rendering I am sure they
>>>> would adjust the selection rules.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Or perhaps we should not force them to adjust their selection rules by
>>> abusing
>>> "historic" to mean "old."  We have start_date=* to specify that things
>>> are old.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regarding “historic means historic as in the battle of Waterloo or the
>>>> pyramids of Gizeh”, we have seen from previous discussion that this was a
>>>> minority opinion.
>>>>
>>>
>>> An explanation, by one person, of what the wiki page says and the
>>> distinction
>>> between "historic" and "historical."  Those do not mean the same thinhg,
>>> however much you wish them to.
>>>
>>> On the one hand we have the wiki page, the distinction between
>>> "historic" and "historical" and a map with the sole purpose of
>>> rendering historic, rather than historical, objects.  On the other
>>> hand we have people who insist that "historic" means "historical."
>>>
>>> Many people see historic as a keyword for objects that typically could
>>>> be seen as historic, but then includes any objects of the class, without
>>>> further  differentiating them by “historic value”.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Many people do not read the wiki page.  Many people do not understand
>>> the distinction between "historic" and "historical."
>>>
>>>>
>>>> We do not have different tags for truly historic wayside shrines or
>>>> crosses and others. How many charcoal piles do you expect to be of
>>>> exceptional historic value?
>>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/historic#values
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would expect a handful, at most, not the tens of thousands that have
>>> been
>>> mapped.  Those SHOULD have been mapped with a lifecycle prefix.  But
>>> people who don't understand the difference between "historic" and
>>> "historical" and don't read the wiki misuse historic=* then document it.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> For guard stones I could imagine using the man_made key as well, but
>>>> historic would seem to work because most of these are giving testimony of
>>>> former times.
>>>>
>>>
>>> "Historic" does not mean "historical."  Those stones are historical but
>>> they are not historic.  If you want to emphasise that they are old,
>>> start_date=* is the way to go.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201209/70e86179/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list