[Tagging] barrows and tumuli

[Anne-Karoline Distel]

Fair enough, that's not historical yet. I was referring to the other 171
already mapped (https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1qiS).

Anne

On 18/01/2023 18:40, Philip Barnes wrote:
> I am using local knowledge here,
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soulton_Long_Barrow
>
> It has been featured on Country File so known outside The Shire.
>
> Phil (trigpoint)
>
> On 18 January 2023 17:55:57 GMT, Anne-Karoline Distel
> <annekadistel at web.de> wrote:
>
>     Well, yes, they're not historic; they're prehistoric. But we tend
>     to map those features with the historic tag nonetheless.
>
>     I don't understand why you say that they're not archaeological,
>     when they're written about by archaeologists and part of
>     archaeological surveys.
>
>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_barrow
>
>     Like many British and Irish barrows (and maybe other areas, but I
>     haven't looked at those in much detail), they are man_made=cairn,
>     though, just under a layer of soil.
>
>     Anne
>
>     On 18/01/2023 17:04, Philip Barnes wrote:
>>     Long barrows are not always archeological or even historic.
>>
>>     Maybe they could be man_made=long_barrow.
>>
>>     Phil (trigpoint)
>>
>>     On 18 January 2023 15:48:42 GMT, Anne-Karoline Distel
>>     <annekadistel at web.de> wrote:
>>
>>         The last couple of days, I've been looking at tumuli/ barrows on the
>>         map, because it turns out, it's the same. I have added that information
>>         to the wiki
>>         (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:archaeological_site%3Dtumulus).
>>         In Ireland and the UK, I've also tried to tidy up the tags, so there are
>>         now no archaeological_site=barrow/ ring-barrow/ round_barrow etc.
>>
>>         I've also drawn diagrams of the different types of tumuli and added a
>>         table on the above mentioned tumulus wiki page which also shows possible
>>         redundant tags.
>>
>>         However, long barrow is documented as archaeological_site=megalith +
>>         megalith_type=long_barrow. They should all fall into the same hierarchy.
>>         This is really my question - should long barrows not also be tagged as
>>         archaeological_site=tumulus + tumulus=long_barrow?
>>
>>         Even when all tumuli are megaliths, but archaeological_site=megalith +
>>         megalith_type=tumulus + tumulus=long_barrow is a bit of an overkill, IMHO.
>>
>>         Anne
>>         ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>         Tagging mailing list
>>         Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Tagging mailing list
>>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>     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/20230118/bca32c39/attachment.htm>