sent from a phone
> On 7. Dec 2020, at 22:56, Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com> wrote: > > And if none of that persuades you, the historic=* tag is treated specially > by the Historic Places map and is given special emphasis. It would > get very cluttered if these stones were classed as historic. I am not saying that these stones should or not get a historic tag, but surely it isn’t an argument that one of the OpenStreetMap based maps highlights things based on a wildcard selection. If this tag would pose a problem for their rendering I am sure they would adjust the selection rules. Regarding “historic means historic as in the battle of Waterloo or the pyramids of Gizeh”, we have seen from previous discussion that this was a minority opinion. Many people see historic as a keyword for objects that typically could be seen as historic, but then includes any objects of the class, without further differentiating them by “historic value”. We do not have different tags for truly historic wayside shrines or crosses and others. How many charcoal piles do you expect to be of exceptional historic value? https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/historic#values For guard stones I could imagine using the man_made key as well, but historic would seem to work because most of these are giving testimony of former times. Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
