I concur that historic or heritage should be secondary tags. Regarding man_made=qanat versus canal=qanat, it is worth pointing out that qanats surface and become surface canals for irrigation and distribution. Thus, it would be continuity to go from waterway=canal, canal=qanat, tunnel=yes to waterway=canal instead. Thoughts?
>> On Jun 26, 2020, at 11:27, Paul Allen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 at 15:57, Walker Bradley <[email protected]> >> wrote: > >> So it would seem that historic=* or heritage=* would be appropriate sub-tags >> for qanats when applicable on top of waterway=canal, canal=qanat, tunnel=yes. > > That's how I see it. Using historic=qanat for modern qanats seems wrong. So > if we need different tagging for modern qanats anyway, then handle historic > qanats by adding historic=yes. >> >> I guess we would need to discuss after the approval of Qanat for what >> criterion/ia would determine historic=yes for qanat. > > See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Historic and then discuss if it needs > modifying/expanding to specifically deal with qanats or if the page for > man_made=qanat needs text clarifying what Historic means for qanats. > > If a historian, even an amateur one, is eager to visit it then it's historic. > If a historian takes a look and says "Meh" then it isn't historic. Which > isn't a very objective metric, so some would say the historic tag > shouldn't be used at all (another good reason to prefer man_made=qanat) > over historic=qanat). > > -- > Paul > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
