[Tagging] Draft proposal for historic cemetery

Thu Feb 11 18:02:27 UTC 2021

Dear Joseph Eisenberg,

The way I see it, this tag is not entirely subjective, but its rules have
not been yet developed. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that you can
tag a building with this tag either if it's older than 1850 or, in case it
is newer than that date, if it has been inhabited by someone famous, if it
has hosted a major event such as the signature of an international treaty
or any other similar conditions that can be verified. The problem, above
all, is that determining an objective use for this tag would lead to
byzantine discussions such as many that we see around here and in the end
nothing would be done. So this will remain a gray area forever and ever.
Instead of that, we can all admit that historic cemeteries do exist and
trust in the good sense of local mappers, as I mentioned earlier. It is
always possible to find an exact definition for historic at a later stage
and make the necessary amendments.

Dear Paul Allen,

The advantage of having a classification of history objects instead of just
adding history=yes is that it creates a very valuable database that can be
easily visualized for anyone with interest on the matter. I don't know why
someone would be so invested against something like that. Nobody forces you
to use tags if you don't see their use or care about the matter, but others
may find it a perfect tool.

Best regards

El jue, 11 feb 2021 a las 18:05, Joseph Eisenberg (<
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com>) escribió:

> Diego,
>
> The problem with this tag is that it is subjective. You have not provided
> any verifiable, objective definition which can be used to determine if a
> cemetery from 1850 should be tagged as historic or not.
>
> We don't map subjective information like restaurant ratings, and we don't
> map historical data which is no longer existing in the real world, like the
> site of an ancient battle which is now developed into a
> suburban residential estate.
>
> The features under historic=* should have something real and current which
> is mappable, and it should be possible to visit the location and confirm
> that the tags are correct or incorrect.
>
> Otherwise, enthusiastic mappers might add this tag to every churchyard and
> cemetery in their area which is older than 50 years, and that provides less
> information than start_date=* and is less verifiable.
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:33 AM Diego Cruz <ginkarasu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Martin Koppenhoefer,
>>
>> When I said Baroque or Chopin, I was simply trying to put examples of
>> reasons to consider a cemetery historic or not. Of course all the
>> cemeteries you mention can have the tag historic=cemetery. If you want me
>> to give you concrete examples instead, I think Recoleta Cemetery in Buenos
>> Aires, Comillas Cemetery in Spain, Worms Jewish Cemetery in Germany or Père
>> Lachaise Cemetery in Paris qualify for this tag, apart from those you
>> mention. We can get lost in the details, but that doesn't mean that this
>> tag isn't useful and applies to existing objects.
>>
>> Dear Paul Allen,
>>
>> I wouldn't put this tag to the first cemetery in a town myself, but local
>> communities may think it fit to do so, because the concept of historic
>> significance can be different according to the place. For example, I
>> wouldn't use this tag much in my own area. Around here people used to be
>> buried inside churches and the currently existing cemeteries are not older
>> than 1850.
>> All the military cemeteries you mention qualify for this tag in my
>> opinion too. I don't see what's the problem there. However, contrary to
>> what you say, if there is a series of Baroque/Merovingian/Native
>> American/whatever-period-you-like-with-historic-significance tombs it can
>> be considered a historic ensemble and the whole can be mapped as historic,
>> apart from the individual tombs.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Diego Cruz
>>
>> El jue., 11 feb. 2021 1:41, Daniel Capilla <dcapillae at gmail.com>
>> escribió:
>>
>>> Hello to all.
>>>
>>> I also think it is important to map what is inside the cemetery, not
>>> just the cemetery itself (the site). If the proposal is approved, I plan to
>>> write an entry in my OSM diary explaining why I have decided to make this
>>> proposal. I visited a historic cemetery in my locality and was mapping some
>>> historic graves, cenotaphs, memorials, columbaria... There is a lot of
>>> local history in a historic cemetery.
>>>
>>> Many historic cemeteries are included in a list of authorised heritage
>>> registrers. Where I live, a medium-sized city in Spain, there are two
>>> historic cemeteries and both are registered by a competent heritage
>>> authority, one national and one regional. However, in OSM this requirement
>>> is not mandatory for mapping a historic feature, so I have left the
>>> question open and referred to what the wiki explains about it.
>>>
>>> Establishing the requirements for mapping a historic feature in OSM goes
>>> beyond this proposal (and beyond my possibilities). This proposal has a
>>> very limited scope in reality. I have modified the draft to make it
>>> clearer. Any suggestions for improvement are welcome.
>>>
>>> In a few days I hope to send the RFC. Thank you for your cooperation and
>>> comments.
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> El 10/2/21 a las 23:50, Martin Koppenhoefer escribió:
>>>
>>> Am Mi., 10. Feb. 2021 um 00:10 Uhr schrieb Diego Cruz <
>>> ginkarasu at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Local users can easily verify if a cemetery is historic or not. This is
>>>> partly subjective, but you need to trust local users' common sense, as in
>>>> any other tag.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is there a series of Baroque tombs? It's historic.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> so it is about age? When you say "baroque", do you mean from the
>>> 17th/18th century, or would late 18th, 19th and 20th century "baroque" also
>>> qualify? The monumental cemetery of Verano (Rome) would probably qualify,
>>> although it was opened only in 1812 (while the baroque period ended around
>>> 1740) and most (?) of it is from the 20th century:
>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Cimitero_del_Verano (on the
>>> other hand, maybe this does not qualify, because there is also a very old
>>> christian place of worship, Saint Lawrence outside the Walls, from the 4th
>>> century AD, which is even a Papal Basilica, and the proposal says: "Its
>>> scope of application is limited to cemeteries in the sense in which they
>>> are understood in OpenStreetMap: «places usually independent of place of
>>> worship» and «not close to a place of worship»"?)
>>>
>>> I guess even younger cemeteries would qualify to be "historic", for
>>> example world war I cemeteries like Douaumont?
>>> https://www.verdun-douaumont.com/en/
>>> This seems an easy case, because it is also a kind of historic=monument
>>> for the Verdun battle.
>>>
>>> Also this is probably a no-brainer, although people are now living there
>>> (it is much older than baroque):
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_the_Dead_(Cairo)
>>>
>>> Generally, I see a lot of overlap with archaeological site for many
>>> historic burial places. All of them which are older than a few hundred
>>> years will probably also qualify for archaelogical site, and there are also
>>> already site types established for it:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:site_type in particular:
>>> necropolis
>>>
>>> Would the Gizeh site qualify for historic=cemetery? A massgrave from the
>>> Bosnian war?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is it the last remaining Jewish cemetery of a region? It's historic.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I find it a bit difficult to make a qualitative assessment based on how
>>> rare something is. If locally there are many old jewish cemeteries, they
>>> would not qualify, but if there is only one left, it would? I am not very
>>> familiar with jewish tradition but I thought to remember that their deads
>>> rest "forever" (or until salvation by the Messiah) in their burial places,
>>> so the cemetery would remain forever a cemetery, even if there are no new
>>> burials, not?
>>>
>>>
>>> Is Chopin buried there? It's historic.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> burial places of famous people are likely noteworthy, but I am not sure
>>> the whole cemetery becomes historic because Chopin is buried there - or Jim
>>> Morrison. (on a sidenote, no doubt that Père Lachaise is a historic
>>> cemetery).
>>>
>>> Not that I could not agree that many cemeteries, or even most, according
>>> to the area you look at, are of historic value. It's almost implicit,
>>> especially for every cemetery older than a few decades and of significant
>>> size. Everybody dies, also famous people, and rich people who can afford to
>>> engage notable artists for the funeral monument, so it seems logical that
>>> any cemetery in a bigger city will have some famous people buried there.
>>>
>>> My recommendation would be to focus on mapping the things that make the
>>> cemetery "historic", both in terms of components (tombs etc.) but also
>>> regarding the attributes of the whole site. E.g. for the age, when it is
>>> known, I would recommend to add explicit reference to the start_date, it is
>>> a datum that already tells more than any historic=yes or cemetery
>>> qualifiers. If it is unknown, you could still add a rough timespan.
>>> Additionally to a start date, it would be interesting to have the "main
>>> period", because it may well be the case that the cemetery was used for
>>> hundreds or even thousands of years, but most of the current tombs are from
>>> a much later time.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tagging mailing listTagging at openstreetmap.orghttps://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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210211/79ba3888/attachment.htm>