According to the wiki ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Afortification_type), the recommended tagging for ring forts is:
- historic <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:historic>= archaeological_site <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Darchaeological_site> - site_type <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:site_type>= fortification <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:site_type%3Dfortification&action=edit&redlink=1> - *fortification_type* <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Afortification_type>=ring_fort <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:fortification_type%3Dring_fort&action=edit&redlink=1> Looking at taginfo.ie ( http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ie/keys/fortification_type#values), there are 76 items tagged as fortification_type=ringfort and 2 as fortification_type=ring_fort. Wikipedia suggests that ringforts and raths are interchangeably used, so I would be inclined to follow the recommended tagging strategy if possible. Mark On Thu, 9 Mar 2017 at 08:52 Rory McCann <r...@technomancy.org> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi. > > I've been mapping ringforts myself. However I've been using a tagging > suggested by brianh, and I've mapped about 1,600 of them. > > historic=earthworks > earthworks=rath > > You can sorta see here that I've bee working through Clare & Kerry: > http://taginfo.openstreetmap.ie/tags/earthworks=rath#map > > or on histosm: http://histosm.org/#9/-9.04724/52.39236/0/earthworks > > I've been using Bing & the GSGS sheets, and I map them if they are > visible on the Bing maps (which IME is nearly always). I think > ringforts are worth mapping. They meet all the requirements for > mapping on OSM. > > The National Monuments Service *have* released all of the > Archaeological Survey of Ireland as (a form of) Open Data, however the > licence is CC-BY 4.0, which is not *yet* compatible with OSM. The OSM > Licensing Working Group should reply Real Soon Now™ with how we can > use it. Once they do, we can speed up the mapping of them a lot. > > > https://data.gov.ie/dataset/national-monuments-service-archaeological-survey-of-ireland > > > On 08/03/17 19:06, Brian Tuffy wrote: > > Hi Keith, There were some already mapped in my area and so I > > started mapping some myself here, > > http://histosm.org/#11/-9.1571/53.827/0/ > > > > HistOSM gives a clearer picture of these kinds of things, the more > > historical things get, the less relevant they are for OSM though. > > I wonder is it possible to add to HistOSM but not to OSM??? > > > > I have used the following tagging, which I adapted from somewhere > > else in Ireland. I also try to add the names if possible. historic > > = archaeological_site site_type= fortification fortification_type > > = ringfort > > > > But I have seen other tagging schemes such as: > > > > - historic=archaeological_site - type=ringfort > > > > > > > > - archaeological_site=fort - historic=archaeological_site - > > name=Abbey Grey Fort - source=GSGS 3906 > > > > > > > > - archaeological_site=cashel - historic=archaeological_site - > > man_made=embankment > > > > > > > > Some might argue that ringforts are not important to map, and I > > suppose they are insignificant if there is no trace of them > > visible (possibly good to map them for Histosm.org though!). In > > rural areas, ringforts can be important landmarks and also townland > > names are sometimes named after ringforts and it's rewarding to see > > a ringfort in a certain townland in that case. Note that the > > rings/ways don't appear in the OSM standard view, just a > > archaeological symbol. > > > > I stopped mapping ringforts for a few reasons. (1) There is just > > way to many of them around (2) not sure of the tagging scheme to > > use myself (3) Somehow hoping that the National Monuments Service > > will provide their open data at some point in the future (4) Not > > sure how useful this data is for OSM. > > http://webgis.archaeology.ie/historicenvironment/ > > > > As far as I can see there is no "standard" for mapping ringforts > > in Ireland and no way to distinguish Carn/ringforts etc. Hopefully > > we can decide on some standard way of tagging ringforts in this > > discussion and I would be happy to add them again too. > > > > Brian T > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Keith <ke...@vool.ie> wrote: > > > >> Helo, > >> > >> Just wondering if there is any common tags used to tag > >> ringforts/rath/lios's etc., and if many have been mapped to date > >> ? > >> > >> Keith > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ Talk-ie mailing > >> list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie > >> > > _______________________________________________ Talk-ie mailing > > list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYwReEAAoJEOrWdmeZivv2hfcH/26lGzwxldUQoFwjzJIKCsIL > JKBlPKIOGWafO1aridSBwM33K4Vf+BrpvAEPb3kEXO9pu1R/Jml2lmNpwxsNtzav > 9PfuJLVeT30qrePYR+YOgc+HIj1YQiPkUuRlFmXsJUtV8RZlNaeQXPf8N9HQRsMg > OZh9i6RUdDov9peMpdFVMAiDxgJ6B5e4ZjOAg1I5YG8cG4xabhjelrxOfizyF3S+ > FiPFF1rV2KIgRptMoLPe/+TE3m64ihiUJXOsPg0SvVLawo0zqTCwZfphU7hzwwTi > Y8yK8/DOTZT2uwzwyy4kZUwHUt0vxlXnjByLKrE7KFFcFwqfkqhB3tzKeGrLLvs= > =EmIH > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ie mailing list > Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie > _______________________________________________ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
