These large bell-instruments their own terminology with a Carillon being defined as having 24+ bells:* "A carillon-like instrument with fewer than 23 bells is called a chime <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chime_(bell_instrument)>." *(ref Wikipedia/Carillon <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carillon>) with the exception of *"Instruments built before 1940 and composed of between 15 and 22 bells may be designated as 'historical carillons.'"* (ref Wikipedia/Carillon <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carillon>)
It seems that tagging these instruments under a overarching category might be good. Something like: man_made=bells + bells=carillon for the larger instruments and man_made=bells + bells=chime for the smaller ones. Those "historical carillons" could get either one or their own value for bells=. This would avoid the potential confusion of calling something with 14 bells a "carillon" which would be inaccurate. On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:22 AM Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 to using man_made=carillon or =bells. > > Don’t use attraction because that is for carousels and roller coasters and > similar things in amusement parks, mostly. > > —Joseph Eisenberg > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:18 AM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> sent from a phone >> >> > On 7. May 2020, at 16:26, lukas-...@web.de wrote: >> > >> > But maybe I will start a proposal with attraction=carillon for tagging >> carillons which are operated as an attraction, but then the definition of >> that has to be very clear, I think. >> >> >> I am all for tagging carillons, if you like with all the details like >> material, number of bells, melodies that are commonly played and at which >> times, etc., but please do not use the “attraction” key. tourism=attraction >> is a questionable tag (how would it be verified/what is an objective >> criterion on distinguish between something being or not yet, an >> attraction?), and it does generally more harm than help to describe the >> world (because it renders a name and many people are not encouraged to push >> it further and actually describe what the thing is). >> >> Just leave it open whether a carillon is an attraction or not, and map: >> “here’s a carillon”. Suitable keys I would examine could be amenity or >> man_made, there could also be a property like carillon=yes/no to indicate >> there’s a carillon at a place (e.g. a tower). >> If you are interested in tagging additional detail it seems better to >> create a distinct object than adding a property to something else. >> >> Cheers Martin >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
