[Tagging] How to tag a threshing floor

António Madeira antoniomadeira at gmx.com
Thu Nov 12 20:53:07 UTC 2020

Thank you, Joseph.

If no one opposes, I'll do just that.

Às 16:43 de 12/11/2020, Joseph Eisenberg escreveu:
> Since the tag man_made=threshing_floor has already been used 7 times
> (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=threshing_floor#values)
> you can create a page to document this, however, you would also need
> to mention that historic=threshing_floor is much more common (actually
> landuse=threshing_floor is also equally common), and it would probably
> be fair to create a historic=threshing_floor wiki page too, in that case.
> If you want to suggest deprecating historic=threshing_floor and
> replacing it with man_made=threshing_floor, or otherwise changing
> existing common usage, you should make a proposal so that the
> community can discuss this.
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 2:53 PM António Madeira via Tagging
> <tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
>     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  <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto: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/20201112/95fdd451/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list