Anne-Karoline Distel <annekadis...@web.de> writes: > I would say that memorial:cause=traffic_accident would leave the options > open whether the victim intended to die or not.
OK but IMHO traffic_crash is better. 'accident' is an assertion of no blame, and there are messy issues of bad luck and negligence. crash is objectively what happened. >>> I don't know if wayside_cross is used for this in some instances, for >>> example, which IMHO it shouldn't be. >> I don't follow. If there is a cross by the road, are you saying that >> depending on the beliefs of the people that put it up about cause, then >> it should or shouldn't be tagged wayside_cross? > > A historic=wayside_cross does not mark the spot; it is not left in a > location where someone is buried or died. It is a way to make sure the > soul of the deceased gets into heaven easier by having passers by pray > for the soul. You don't have to believe in it, but that's what people > believed back then (and maybe some still do). I didn't grow up with this > practise, but this is what Catholic people did in Early Modern Ireland. > Not every cross by the wayside is a wayside cross. Like so many things > in the historic category, the tagging is a bit messy. Some examples in > my area: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1vVq > > I guess I have a topic for a new video... There are a couple more > surviving in County Kilkenny, but I want to keep some work for the video. I see; that's different. In the US, one typically finds crosses by the road where presumably the crash occured and nobody thinks it is necessarily the location of death. But again, do these have labels? How do you tell? Definitely a good thing to explain to everyone. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
