On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 06:47, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Within OSM 'we' could adopt that rock_art is where both carving and > painting are used together? That would distinguish it from either of the > above. > > > There are some 22 uses of site_type=rock_art, I think most of them would > go to either site_type=rock_painting or site_type=petroglyph only > leaving a very few of this type. >
Site_type=* is a subtag of historic=*. Both are largely the demesne of the mapper Lutz because they were defined by him for use on his historic place project: http://gk.historic.place/ I'm not saying he is the ultimate arbiter of those tags, because OSM is anarchic and nobody controls anything. However, his project is the only carto I know of where those tags are rendered. You are free to add any site_type you wish, even without prior discussion here, but if you want them to be rendered anywhere it's best to get in touch with Lutz and discuss it with him. BTW, I don't know if Lutz is male or female but trying to rewrite the above in gender-neutral language is difficult. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
