Some of the most used historical tags are for things that are just old, not
necessarily disused or with another use than the original one. Wayside
cross and shrine, monuments, memorials, castles etc. It just seems to
signify a special relationship with history, not much more than that.

But then there is the conflict with other historic tags a road might have.

On the other hand, if cutting does not imply "constructed" it seems like
the perfect fit. But the wiki for cutting seems to imply this ("an
excavated section").
Also, cutting can be defined as left/right/both, which is kind of possible
for sunken lanes too.

So that makes me think of a third solution, where we use a dedicated tag
sunken_lane=yes. This could then be seen as a fine-tuning of cutting. Data
consumers would then have to look for a subtag to decide what kind of
cutting it is. Or we could define it as "do not use it together"; say if
you combine it, it would mean "a former sunken lane that has now been
artificially cut". Doing this would also make it possible to add a
left/right value for cases where the sunken lane is very asymmetrical.
But that would mean an entirely new tag.

In all, I think I like historic=sunken_lane best. In the cases where two
values apply, well, that's just part of a bigger issue we'll have to deal
with somewhere else.

As for the word hollow_way, seems there is still some discussion about
that, so we now have six options :)

I still haven't heard of a procedure to vote on tag A over tag B, so I've
invented my own. You can vote here:

I'll adapt the proposal to whatever wins and put that up for a vote.
Tagging mailing list

Reply via email to