Proposal talk:Historic=ceremonial gate

Tag suggestion

There was discussion on community.osm.org. Maybe the tag could be man_made=ceremonial_gate and the class subtags simply ceremonial_gate=*? IMHO there is no need to define it as East Asian specific gates, the subtypes that are proposed to map the specific gate are probably sufficient for defining to which culture the gate belongs, and we could potentially have other subtypes of ceremonial gates that aren't related to East Asia. --Dieterdreist (talk) 13:32, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I heartily agree with this suggestion. This will also make the tag more logical to use, when a new ceremonial gate is built, which is obviously not yet "historic". GOwin (talk)

I strongly agree.

Grouping similar attributes together is versatile in that it can be used for structures with similar attributes even in completely different cultural contexts later on, and I think it is a logical approach that does not need to be added to or changed, given that sub-tags have been provided for details. --깨몽/dreamy (talk) 03:08, 30 May 2025 (UTC) / OSM Intercultural Exchange(Telegram)

---

The proposer has already clarified certain criteria, including: “Not ordinary access-control gates”, “Not generic monuments”, and “Due to its cultural and historical significance, it is not appropriate to classify it merely as a ‘man-made’ object (man_made=*)”.

Building upon that foundation, I would like to articulate my own understanding of what constitutes a “ceremonial gate”.

The semantic characteristics should generally be understood as the following: a boundary of a sacred space + a symbolic gateway.

Furthermore, if the origin of a structure aligns with these characteristics, it should be regarded accordingly, even if it was constructed in modern times.

However, structures that merely imitate the outward form without following this origin—such as simple replicas, monuments, or commemorative installations—should be considered open to debate.

The primary formal characteristics are as follows:

• A non-architectural structure primarily composed of columns, typically lacking full wall enclosures or incorporating only partial, non-substantial wall elements.
• An open configuration that does not enclose space in a spatial or functional sense.
• A structurally independent and freestanding form, not physically connected to larger architectural entities.
• It serves no utilitarian purpose beyond marking the threshold of a space and signaling its sacredness or ceremonial importance—i.e., it is not used for dwelling, resting, waiting, or shelter.
• It typically takes the form of a gate or portal at the entrance of a defined space, though it may also consist of free-standing pillars adjacent to a path—in any case, it does not take the form of a building.

The distinction between non-architectural structures and buildings may warrant further examination, but for the purposes of consistent classification, it is reasonable to limit the scope to non-building structures.

Examples that largely share common origins and functions include:

India’s Torana, Vietnam’s Tam quan, China’s Paifang, Korea’s Iljumun and Hongsalmun, Japan’s Torii, and Thailand’s Sao Ching Cha.

Additional structures that exhibit similar symbolic functions include:

The Sacred Grove Entrances in Yoruba regions of Africa and the Lychgate in the United Kingdom.

There are also noteworthy variations:

• The Lychgate in Britain may feature more than four columns and partial walling, but still maintains an overall open form.
• Bali’s Candi Bentar in Indonesia consists of two split structures flanking a path, rather than forming a continuous arch or gate.
• In Tibetan Buddhism, chortens take the form of stupas and are associated with the conceptual transition into a sacred space upon passing them. This ritualized sense of boundary formation occurs even in the absence of a defined gate structure. In this respect, it warrants consideration whether chortens may be viewed as functionally analogous to structures such as the Candi Bentar of Bali, Indonesia.

Some structures, though similar in purpose (marking sacred boundaries), fall outside the defined scope due to their architectural nature or additional functional complexity. Examples include:

• South India’s Gopuram, which are monumental gateways integrated into temple complexes and considered architectural buildings.
• The Islamic Bab(باب) found in the Middle East, which serve as city gates or entrances to religious compounds but are architecturally enclosed.

---

--깨몽/dreamy (talk) 11:37, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

The preliminary discussions are taking place in the official community (here). Please join the discussion in the official community. --깨몽/dreamy (talk) 12:36, 30 May 2025 (UTC)