[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - defensive structures

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Sat Jul 17 03:23:55 UTC 2021


"fortification_type=ringfort - deprecated in favour of historic=castle + castle=type + ruins=yes"

castle=type?

Also, tagging 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Multivallate_Ringfort_at_Rathrar_(Rathbarna_Enclosure_Complex),_Co_Roscommon,_Ireland.jpg
or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillfort
as a castle seems a terrible mistake to me.

Yes, we have castle_type=manor and other horrible mistakes but making it worse
is not helpful.

Overall I suspect that this proposal is doing too much at once and people will be
opposed for variety of unrelated reasons.

Jul 17, 2021, 00:57 by casperkersten1 at gmail.com:

> Dear all,
>
> I have updated my proposal with considerations and deprecations of overlapping tagging schemes. I have also added a paragraph that introduces the tag outwork=* as a supplementary tag that defines what kind of outwork a defensive structure is, if it is one of course. With these additions, the proposal has taken the shape of a holistic approach for tags of military defensive structures. I am aware that tag deprecations tend to bring controversy, but I hope that the benefit of the proposed scheme outweighs the drawbacks. 
>
> For your convenience, this is the link to the proposal: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Defensive_structures
>
> Kid regards,
>
> Casper
>
>>
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210717/9d27cca0/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list