[Talk-GB] Historic England - tagging guidelines - can we agree on the English usage

Sun Aug 15 12:43:21 UTC 2021

Hi

heritage:operator=Historic England;Cadw mult-value style is certainly 
documented. However I have a personal preference for single value tags, 
I think they are easier to work with. I also have my doubts about 
ability of searchers and renderers working effectively with multi-value 
tags, some may call that tagging for the renderer - I prefer designing 
for use.

Any other thoughts on multi-value tags in this context or which way to go?

Tony

On 15/08/2021 12:58, Edward Bainton wrote:
> > object Z - tagged with physical properties, it is then a member in 
> two relations, a relation A holding Historic England refs and a 
> relation B holding Cadw refs.
> Would having two heritage:operator tags, or using a semicolon 
> separator, be a problem? I can't see why it would be, and we would 
> then avoid adding a relation.
>
> eg,
>
> name=Chirk Viaduct
> man_made=bridge
> heritage:operator=Historic England;Cadw
> ref:GB:he=12345
> ref:GB:cadw=67890
>
> Or is the problem that the viaduct is in two jurisdictions so needs 
> dividing at the border? That would seem a bit too hair (or bridge ;-) 
> -splitting to me, as such cases must be very rare.
>
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2021 at 12:23, Tony Shield <tonyosm9 at gmail.com 
> <mailto:tonyosm9 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     I haven't forgotten this - work and some thought have intervened.
>
>     The agreed basis is
>
>     heritage:operator=Historic England
>     heritage:operator=Cadw
>     heritage:operator=Historic Environment Scotland
>     heritage:operator=Northern Ireland Environment Agency
>
>     ref:GB:he=12345
>     ref:GB:hs=LB2345
>     ref:GB:cadw=34567
>     ref:GB:niea=55643
>
>     this also works for non statutory organisations eg CAMRA
>
>     heritage:operator=CAMRA
>
>     ref:GB:CAMRA=xyz
>
>     I think that in the case where an object is in two or more lists
>     e.g. Chirk Aqueduct then relations needs to be used, my concept is
>
>     object Z - tagged with physical properties, it is then a member in
>     two relations, a relation A holding Historic England refs and a
>     relation B holding Cadw refs. This relation method also works for
>     example a pub in CAMRA and Historic England
>
>     I'll start making the wiki changes in the next day or so if there
>     are no objections.
>
>     Tony
>
>
>     On 28/07/2021 13:55, SK53 wrote:
>>     Late to this as ever. I think Robert summarised all the important
>>     things I wanted to say, so just a few additions:
>>
>>     * Use cases: I imagine the primary use cases will be related to
>>     individual lists, so ensuring that they are readily discoverable
>>     at the list level helps.
>>     * Using an Operator tag as effectively part of the primary key
>>     has problems in that it's easy to make typos or to forget what
>>     the canonical form of the operator name is in osm (check out
>>     Weatherspoons, for instance).
>>     * Other heritage lists. There are a considerable number of
>>     perfectly valuable non-statutory heritage lists. Off the top of
>>     my head those of Camra (Heritage Pubs), 20th Century Society
>>     (active in achieving the recent listing of Dunelm House), local
>>     civic societies, railway heritage groups
>>     <http://www.rhrp.org.uk/surveystatus.htm>, and local authorities
>>     (which may retain lists which will be considered for planning
>>     purposes).
>>     * List ownership changes, as mentioned. The earliest mention of
>>     UK listed status I'm familiar with is in volumes of the Pevsner
>>     series abbreviated as MHLG, and even in the history of OSM we've
>>     seen English Heritage transform to Heritage England, and similar
>>     changes in many natural heritage bodies.
>>
>>     I think including a country code in the key is probably useful to
>>     provide context & avoid potential collisions in use of initials.
>>
>>     Jerry
>>
>>     On Sat, 24 Jul 2021 at 12:08, Mark Goodge <mark at good-stuff.co.uk
>>     <mailto:mark at good-stuff.co.uk>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>         On 24/07/2021 00:15, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
>>         >
>>         > There's also the potential for more than one organisation
>>         to assign a
>>         > heritage reference number to the same object. In addition to a
>>         > national body, there may be local or international bodies that
>>         > catalogue heritage assets. It's also possible that some
>>         assets that
>>         > lie near or across national boundaries will be catalogued
>>         by more than
>>         > one national body.
>>
>>         There certainly are cross-border structures that are listed
>>         by more than
>>         one heritage authority. Chirk aqueduct and Chirk viaduct, for
>>         example,
>>         are both listed by both Historic England and Cadw.
>>
>>         https://britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/listed-buildings-map?loc=18,52.9280178,-3.0621707
>>         <https://britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/listed-buildings-map?loc=18,52.9280178,-3.0621707>
>>
>>         Mark
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Talk-GB mailing list
>>         Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
>>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>         <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Talk-GB mailing list
>>     Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org  <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
>>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb  <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Talk-GB mailing list
>     Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>     <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20210815/019bc4ad/attachment.htm>