[Tagging] How to tag a threshing floor

António Madeira antoniomadeira at gmx.com
Wed Nov 11 22:50:20 UTC 2020


So, given that most of those who commented this thread agreed that
threshing_floor should be in the man_made scheme, should I add it to the
wiki or create a Feature Proposal?


Às 19:27 de 06/11/2020, Paul Allen escreveu:
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 21:53, Martin Koppenhoefer
> <dieterdreist at gmail.com <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Am Fr., 6. Nov. 2020 um 13:56 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen
>     <pla16021 at gmail.com <mailto:pla16021 at gmail.com>>:
>
>         On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 09:09, Martin Koppenhoefer
>         <dieterdreist at gmail.com <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     ...
>
>             To me it doesn't make sense to draw a line, dividing the
>             same objects having more or less historic value. If there
>             is something to distinguish at all, my suggestion would be
>             to add a qualifier to those objects of exceptional
>             historical value (if this is verifiable).
>
>
>         We have a way of tagging objects of exceptional historical
>         value, it's
>         historic=*.  Objects of unexceptional historical value, or of
>         no historical
>         value do not get tagged with historic=*.  That's because
>         historic is
>         not a synonym (in the real world or in tagging) for old,
>         disused or
>         repurposed.
>
>
>     just that it is not what we are currently doing.
>
> That is not what some of us are currently doing.  Others read the wiki
> page
> and tag accordingly.
>
> It occurs to me that some of the mis-tagging (as I see it) and some of the
> discussions here may revolve around semantics as interpreted by
> those who do not have English as a first language.  There is a
> difference between "historical" and "historic."
>
> Historians are concerned with historical data.  Old data (about
> populations, diseases or whatever) is historical data. The
> assassination of a minor archduke, which seemed unimportant
> at the time, quickly turned into a historic event.
>
> When somebody says that "historic" applies to everything that
> historians do, that is incorrect.  What historians mostly do is
> look at historical data, some small fraction of which is
> also historic.
>
> See https://www.grammarly.com/blog/historic-historical/
> for a better explanation.
>
> So historic=* really should only apply (as the wiki page states) to
> the important
> things of the past, not everything some random historian might happen
> to be looking into.
>
> So the question is, do we accept that because some mappers have misused
> the tag we should encourage that misuse or do we discourage it?
>
> --
> Paul
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201111/0dc5454e/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list