2010/12/16 Steve Bennett <[email protected]>: > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Richard Welty <[email protected]> > wrote: >> it depends on what an attraction is. i'm not averse to using it, but in the >> US at least, an attraction is usually some place you park, maybe buy >> tickets, and go in a building, park, etc for a more extended experience. > > Yeah, but don't go thinking that every cultural stereotype surrounding > the word "attraction" has to apply to a tag of the same name. > > Btw, historic=yes is another candidate. Of the existing tags, that > might be the best actually.
IMHO those could both (the highway-marker and the dog) be tagged as landmarks. Both of them do IMHO not qualify for artwork and at least the marker is surely not an attraction (I guess also the dog is not really a tourist attraction, but this should be judged upon with local knowledge). I found this page about landmarks, which seems to see landmarks only as stuff related to navigation on the water (I would ignore this or better amend the page): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landmark cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
