A tomb without a body, built to commemorate dead whose remains lie elsewhere, is a 'cenotaph'.
There's an earlier, inconclusive, thread on the topic: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-September/030196.html On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Michal Fabík <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > some time ago, I was wondering what would be the proper way to tag a stećak > (plural form stećci), a large monolithic tombstone, often with carved > inscriptions and/or ornaments, found in Bosnia and neighbouring countries > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ste%C4%87ak). > > They are usually the shape of a large coffin (though other shapes exist > too), but they are solid stone, unlike sarcophagi, which really _are_ > coffins, i.e. hollow. They are usually found in groups from a few up to a > few hundred. The groups of stećci are locally known as necropolises, though > they don't quite fit the Wiki's definition of a necropolis - "a large > ancient cemetery with elaborate tomb monuments" - they are not necessarily > large, they aren't really ancient (they're medieval) and they're hardly > elaborate monuments - it's just biggish stone blocks strewn randomly on a > meadow. > > Normally, it would probably be enough to tag the necropolis as a whole > (probably as some sort of a historic=archaeological_site) but like I said, > sometimes they are isolated and sometimes they have been moved to a another > location altogether. Furthermore, there are efforts to catalogue them and > decipher/translate the inscriptions carved into some of them, so it can > definitely be of interest to some people to know where exactly a particular > stećak is located. > > They are usually described as tombstones though I'm not 100% sure if all of > them are tombstones, there might be some that served some other > (ceremonial?) purpose rather that marking an actual grave, but I might be > wrong. Then there are some that used to mark a grave but were moved to a > different location (there are some on display in front of a museum in > Sarajevo and some other places) so they should be tagged as stand-alone > objects, not as features of graves. The graves themselves aren't > significant, to my knowledge - most of them are nameless, they aren't > normally researched/exhumed etc. > > I've started a thread on the Bosnian forum > (https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=56800, in Serbo-Croatian) > but I only got one answer since the Bosnian community isn't exactly active, > so I thought I'd ask what you guys think, even though some of you might not > be familiar with the subject. > > So far, I have a couple of ideas in mind: > > historic=rune_stone + historic:civilization=* > > + both are established tags > + to a layperson it gives a pretty good idea what to expect > - they are not rune stones > - there is no consensus as to what civilization created them, unless we use > something very generic like "Bosnian_pre-islamic" or similar > > > historic=tombstone + tombstone=stećak > > + probably the most accurate > - not well established (just one occurrence of historic=tombstone according > to taginfo.osm.org) > - not sure whether all of them are tombstones > > historic=stećak > > + straightforward and accurate > - not established at all > - hardly anybody knows what a stećak is IRL > - contains a non-ASCII character, some people might not be bothered to spell > it properly > > historic=stecak > > + more user friendly than the above > - "wrong" spelling - might confuse users who speak the local language, i.e. > the ones most likely to map them > > > So, any suggestions? > > Best regards, > > -- > Michal > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
