Hey I was just thinking about this myself the other day. "Petroglyph is image created by removing part of a rock surface by incising, picking, carving, or abrading, as a form of rock art." So when there is on engraving, only paint then petroglypth would be incorrect based on that definition.
Rock art (parietal art) is a superset of petroglyph. That is cave paintings and petroglypths are both forms of rock art, at least from my reading of wikipedia. So I think, an engraving with no paint => site_type:petroglyph a rock art with no engraving => site_type:cave_painting with site_type:parietal_art being a valid less specific tag for both. I agree that tourism=artwork doesn't seem right, given they were not created for tourism in the first place, and not necessarily as artworks either! On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 11:14, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > Aboriginal rock engravings are tagged; > > "historic"="archaeological_site" > > site_type"="petroglyph" > > > What should Aboriginal painted sites be tagged? > > > "historic"="archaeological_site" > > site_type"= ??? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
