Your examples are rather ridiculous. A Viking captain, or King Arthur's sword, would not be logical items to have on a map. A building or archaeological site likely would be on a map, and tagging them with the civilization and era would make it easy to generate special-interest maps.
-------Original Email------- Subject :Re: [Tagging] RFC: historic:civilization and historic:period Re:new key civilization From :mailto:pier...@gmail.com Date :Wed Jan 12 10:23:21 America/Chicago 2011 On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 4:40 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com <mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com> > wrote: 2011/1/12 <j...@jfeldredge.com <mailto:j...@jfeldredge.com> >: I made a starting page. I also added some initial values for historic:period to the page, but there is still space for more detail, e.g. historic:era to put the name of a regent/despot or what the classification is. I would like to have the page in the end quite detailed, including years (if possible) and so on. Am I the only one who is thinking that such information are better placed in Wikipedia than in OSM ? Or many of this list readers decided to lazily shut their mouth because they hope that such tags will never become popular ? What is the next proposal : a tag for the name of the captain of the viking boats who invaded England during first millenium ? A subtag for the weight and length of the king Arthur's sword ? Pieren _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
