2011/5/5 John Smith <[email protected]> > On 6 May 2011 01:09, Andre Engels <[email protected]> wrote: > > Unless you are in New Zealand, you're unlikely to tag the same thing: > > It's being used for a Maori fortress, see > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C4%81_%28M%C4%81ori%29 > > That seems too specific, it should be a subset of historic=fort, and > even then how many of these still actually have some kind of physical > presence, which is the argument against tagging historically > significant events. >
Aren't we nitpicking? I've tagged remains of Roman cities whose "physical presence" is arguable, but nonetheless those are places of historical interest in that a Roman building or forum was there. I agree it'd be moot to map Troy based on the supposed position, but for well-documented POIs we shouldn't be discussing whether a fort is still a fort. After all, most European castles aren't actually used as castles anymore. Regards, Simone
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
