[Tagging] Voting tombs proposal

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Sun Mar 21 15:17:54 UTC 2021

Am So., 21. März 2021 um 16:00 Uhr schrieb Marc_marc <marc_marc at mailo.com>:

> Le 21.03.21 à 15:37, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit :
> > I hope I have been able to address all concerns that have been risen in
> > the discussion period.
> no really :
> - using historic=* for object without any historic signifiance

this is nothing specific I could solve with a proposal for tombs. A part
from this, I also do not share the concerns that have been brought forward
by you and Paul, about "historic significance". And I would not even reject
the idea that tombs aren't bearing historic significance in general.

> - less important : I still don't see the value that would be appropriate
> for a simple tombstone placed on top of the hole where the coffin is
> (I'm talking about mapping the whole tomb, not the hole and the stone
> separately)

As the proposal is about tombs, it does not cover headstones which aren't
connected to tombs.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210321/1a112ff8/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list