[OSM-talk] Castles and Palaces

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2009/6/4 Nop <ekkehart at gmx.de>:
> This may be true from an archeological point of view, but a tag does not
> have to be a scientifically exact term.

I don't see the point. It was proposed a tag for a sub-feature that
occurs just in areas where English is not the native language, with an
internationally recognised term. It is there (quite a long time) in
the wiki. Why should it be changed?

> Most common tags are not exact matches (e.g. motorway, secondary) or even

they are well defined and therefore used. Why should motorway not be
an exact match?

> If we can make non-scientific tags work everywhere else why deviate for
> building types?

to avoid confusion about certain building types. This is not even
about the main tag (historic=castle) which everyone without special
knowledge can apply to all "big houses", you are complaining about a
sub tag (castle_type). I really don't see the problem. I think by
changing this you would destroy the work already done in this field
for OSM.

Martin