Talk:Proposed features/tombs

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

For tumulus there is already a definition: historic=archaeological_site + site_type=tumulus. --WalterSchloegl 17:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I also found this definition, but for tagging single tumuli part of a bigger site (the situation I mostly meet here) I prefer to tag them as tombs and tag the archeological_site for the whole. -- Dieterdreist 13:57, 5 April 2012 (BST)

I would propose rock_cut instead of rock-cut, because underline is much more in use than '-'. --WalterSchloegl 17:03, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

there is a difference between "rock-cut" and "rock_cut". The first is a composite word (rock-cut) the second would be two words seperated by a space ("rock cut"). In this case the word is rock-cut -- Dieterdreist 13:57, 5 April 2012 (BST)
Can we begin to vote? --Władysław Komorek 09:25, 4 October 2012 (BST)


IMHO a tombstone is not a subtype of a tomb (but a part of it) and should not be mapped as historic=tomb therefor. --Dieterdreist (talk) 12:37, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

After short discussion on the tagging ML today, I have removed the tomb=tombstone tag from this proposal. A tombstone is not a tomb and can mostly be found on graves that aren't tombs either. --Dieterdreist (talk) 17:04, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

tomb=war_grave to war_tomb ?

As it is tombs that are to be tagged, graves should not be tagged. And this would be a better photo for that ? Amarjavan.JPG Other photos can be found on wikipedia - tomb unknown solider provided the above photo, there are others there.

Warin61 (talk) 09:43, 10 July 2015 (UTC)