[Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - Qanat"

Joseph Guillaume josephguillaume at gmail.com
Sun Jun 21 01:00:15 UTC 2020


Hi Martin,

I may not fully understand the historic tag, but to me it is unlikely that
every qanat is of historic interest, "of sufficient importance to justify
use of this tag". In some areas, every village has three qanats. It would
be like mapping every fountain as historic.

They're often not considered of historic interest locally, let alone
nationally or internationally.

Hope this clarifies my thinking...

Cheers,

JoeG


On Sun., 21 Jun. 2020, 10:17 am Martin Koppenhoefer, <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 21. Jun 2020, at 01:59, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Can there be old underground water conveying structures that people have
>> dug into the ground, that are not “historic”? Can you explain what kind of
>> situation you are thinking about?
>>
>
> The tag historic=* is not a synonym for old.  It is more nuanced than
> that.  See
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Historic
>
>
>
> I am aware of the historic key and its meaning and my question stands.
> How or in which cases can a structure like this not be suitable for the
> historic key?
>
> 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/20200621/5db0e855/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list