[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC -mass rock

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Fri Apr 2 12:53:12 UTC 2021

On Fri, 2 Apr 2021 at 13:30, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> to clarify:
> I am 100% fine with tagging existing and visible remains/ruins

So you won't have a problem with tagging a mass rock.  Which tags get
used are open to discussion, but even you have to agree that if the
rock is still there, it can be mapped.

> I am not accepting mapping things of completely and utterly
> gone, without any trace whatsoever - and without danger of
> accidental remapping.

The rocks are still there.  And can be mapped as natural=rock
(or bare_rock or whatever).  Plus some other tags.

Actually, a rock doesn't have to have been used for masses to be
sacred.  And it may still be in use.  And it's mappable.

If we come up with a sensible set of tags for holy rocks, I'll
map it.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210402/a98ac976/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list