[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - holy well

[Anne-Karoline Distel]

I agree that it's both "magic", but I'd say state bodies are more likely
to protect sites that are connected to "real religion".

I agree that historic sacred wells should be tagged as well, but the
historic tag opens up a rabbit hole every time. I'm afraid we're gonna
end up with a historic tag on every holy well, which some people will
not be in favour of. I wouldn't like it for the holy wells in Ireland,
because AFAIK they are still used for their intended use, not like
building=church which is now used as a house or a restaurant or a library.

Landuse=religious might be useful, if there is a wish tree/ rag tree
nearby, but I think two nodes would do the trick as well.

(On a related matter, there are mass paths in Ireland, tracks/ footways
that were only used to go to church. I need to read up more about it,
because that is another thing the council wants to map. I don't know if
they lead to holy wells as well. I have only mapped one and used
name=Mass path, but I'm not sure if that is sufficient.)

Anne

Am 19/02/2021 um 10:00 schrieb Stefan Tauner:
> On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 18:31:56 +0000
> Anne-Karoline Distel <annekadistel at web.de> wrote:
>
>> I understand it's a bit of a tricky one. Wishing wells/ fountains mostly
>> used by tourists should not count, because there is not an established
>> religion behind that thinking of leaving a coin for good luck.
> I strongly disagree. That's not different to what "religions" "offer":
> feeling better by doing something irrational because someone else
> pretends it has a positive effect.
> However, I agree with you that in the OSM data model it fits better into
> the realm of place_of_worship than tourism and since it does not perturb
> other tags related to wells I think the proposed scheme is OK.
>
> However, I think it might make more sense to include more historic
> sites that I think are excluded by the current proposal, e.g.:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuragic_holy_well
> historic=water_well might very well fit the "holy" wells in ireland too?
> They are definitely nothing new :)
> In any case, the handling of such places should be covered in the
> proposal text IMHO.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210219/2f532ff2/attachment.htm>