On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 06:04:32PM +0100, Elizabeth Oldham wrote:
> On 25/09/17 17:13, ael wrote:
> > Well, surely this make the tag so general as to be pretty useless. The
> > original meaning was pretty specific and useful. "Moor" or something
> > equivalant is well understood (in the UK, at least) and is useful as
> > a broad description where detailed mapping is absent.
> > 
> > Anyway, I take it that no one is objecting to my changes and wanting to
> > revert them?
> No objection here. Descriptive word is moor, everyone and his dog recognises
> it for what it is. The use of heath to describe moors is simply bizarre.

That was exactly my feeling, but the link to 
given by Kevin suggests that perhaps some variety of heath is not too
wrong after all.


Talk-GB mailing list

Reply via email to