[Tagging] Draft proposal for historic cemetery

[Daniel Capilla]

Great! Thank you Brian.

El 11/2/21 a las 22:48, Brian M. Sperlongano escribió:
> I was for this at first, but I think I've been swayed by Paul's 
> arguments here.  I think about it from a data consumer perspective.  I 
> might want to search for "all cemeteries" or "all historic things".  
> If historic cemeteries are tagged with historic=yes, I can do both 
> more easily.  If historic=cemetery is added, then I have yet another 
> way that I now need to search for cemeteries, and it's unclear whether 
> traditional cemetery tagging should also be applied.
>
> So I'd say this should probably not be proposed.  Document the 
> existing usage, but also document that this can also be tagged 
> (cemetery) + historic=yes.  It would also be useful to compare the 
> relative tag count of both approaches.
>
> I do think it is useful generally to tag historical cemeteries.  In my 
> area, we have government signs for them and therefore it's easy to 
> decide whether a cemetery is historical or not.  The fact that other 
> places do not have a similar black and white distinction is not a good 
> argument against the idea that historical cemeteries should be 
> mapped.  For such places, local communities can come up with criteria 
> that make sense.
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 3:20 PM Daniel Capilla <dcapillae at gmail.com 
> <mailto:dcapillae at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 11/2/21 20:47, Paul Allen wrote:
>     > Our tagging space is slowly degenerating from the white noise of
>     entropy.
>
>     I want a T-shirt with that on it! :D
>
>     Joking aside, I understand what Paul is saying. However, this
>     proposal
>     does not try to solve a problem that goes beyond it.
>
>     The mappers are using "historic=cemetery". It seems to me to be
>     appropriate to indicate a cemetery of historic significance in
>     accordance with the guidelines for the use of the"historic" key. The
>     value is not confusing, its meaning is quite clear.
>
>     If you think my proposal might cause confusion if it is approved (or
>     even if it is proposed), I can withdraw it and just document the
>     tag on
>     the wiki as a tag in use but not formally proposed.
>
>     In my opinion, this proposal is very simple, useful, and not
>     problematic, but you have more experience than me. What do you
>     suggest
>     to me? I am open to suggestions. My initial intention was to
>     clarify the
>     issue, not to obscure it further.
>
>     Question for the Tagging mailing list: Should I propose it or not?
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Daniel
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>     <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/b51e7af5/attachment.htm>