[Tagging] Voting tombs proposal

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 25 14:01:07 UTC 2021

On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 at 13:36, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>

Please be aware that “historic” is not about (elevated) historic
> significance, it is about things “that are of historic interest”. Any tomb
> is of historic interest.

To a degree, maybe.  Some are of far less interest than others.  Like just
every grave in a churchyard, all of which are technically tombs.  Most of
graves in Highgate Cemetery are of no interest to anyone except descendents
of the interred, but the tomb of Karl Marx gets a lot of visitors.

> My suggestion is to discourage the man_made tag and do it the other way
> round: add qualifying tags to those particular and outstanding tombs with
> the reasons for their significance.

Or we could have historic=tomb + historic_significance=no instead of
man_made=tomb.  That would work.  Sort of.  It makes as much sense
as rejecting man_made=tomb + optional historic=yes as a solution.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210325/189f812f/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list