If I come to a normal temple with a normal Stupa (because I can’t tell the difference between them), which tag should be the first that comes to mind when I want to tag it? I don’t care much about this whole discussion, I just want to go out into the world and start tagging Stupas.
Don’t take this in a provocative way, but I think there could be a standard for how we generally tag Stupas unless they are clearly special (e.g. a monument).
I think it’s a fairly straight forward tagging situation. I tag the place_of_worship using either a closed way or node as appropriate, then I tag the stupa as a node or closed way with man_made=tower and tower:type=stupa. In other words I’m tagging the stupa as a structure only and not ascribing any other significance to it. If it sits atop or is part of a place_of_worship, or a monument, so be it. Use a node or a closed way for either, or both, structures. The two major tags are not mutually exclusive because at top level one is an amenity and the other is man_made.
I’m in the process of working out a Garmin icon for stupa with the Lambertus folks. Hopefully we will end up with something for OSM as well.
I think it’s a fairly straight forward tagging situation. I tag the place_of_worship using either a closed way or node as appropriate, then I tag the stupa as a node or closed way with man_made=tower and tower:type=stupa. In other words I’m tagging the stupa as a structure only and not ascribing any other significance to it. If it sits atop or is part of a place_of_worship, or a monument, so be it. Use a node or a closed way for either, or both, structures. The two major tags are not mutually exclusive because at top level one is an amenity and the other is man_made.
I’m in the process of working out a Garmin icon for stupa with the Lambertus folks. Hopefully we will end up with something for OSM as well.
I am confused. So, on the one hand you say there is not consensus to tag stupas, on the other hand, what you basically say is that all should be labeled now as tower-stupas, even though we have established that many are not.
Now, if other stupas are labeled differently, e.g. all the ones labeled as monument-stupa, will they also render properly with the Garmin icon? If not, shouldn’t we as community decide on a single way of tagging stupas so they all render appropriately?
monument=stupa is used 91 times on a single site, the Erdene Zuu Monastery
47.2015302, 102.8432013
and then at only three more places in Cambodia. So in total used at four sites.
tower:type=stupa is more widespread and used by more people.
Given that with the bell towers we have a similar concept already I’m in slight favor of the tower:type tagging.
Did you already ask for input at a wider audience on the tagging list?
Given that stupa is not used that much yet, I think there is still time to arrive at a consensus. I thought indeed the idea was to get a consensus from a wider audience. Given we have already non-intuitive tags, it seemed to me that one should try to avoid that. I have outlined above - I can summarize again if desired - why I think tower is such a good idea for stupa since many are not towers.
Bell tower may seem like a similar concept, but it is actually derived from real towers, hence natural.
She would like to distinguish these still actively “used”, usually located in a temple and the more “historic” ones just being there as you won’t tear them down.
I think I had tagged the later ones historic=ruins. Not sure it’s the best way to do. If you can come up with a better way of tagging, please do so.
Well, perhaps in a way you are right that something like MapMaker might be what I’m looking for. On the other hand, the reason I went now with OSM is that one can download the maps without constantly being connect to some network, that’s really the attraction - an open source map.
Still, there seems to be sort of a split personality, on the one hand people discuss and agree, and other, everybody can do what they want… Ok, it’s exaggerated, but I guess you get my gist. I’m not looking for a big navtec document, but a few more guidelines, that can also help newcomers, wouldn’t that be useful?
So, you’re proposing adding a new man_made=temple tag?
I like the ruins=yes tag because it allows one to tag any ruins regardless of historical value, about which a casual mapper might not be aware. I’m not sure how it affects the tower:type=stupa discussion, however.
No definite proposal yet, just thinking out loud, seems still ongoing discussions perhaps. But in any case,
yes, the ruins=yes does sound good, because it could potentially be attached to building.
as to stupa, yes, it’s off a tangent a bit, on the other hand, stupa could be just a part of the whole framework of how to label wats/temples/palaces and their ruined variants.
One has to cover Mon/Dvaravati, Khmer, and the Thai historical periods for that. Periods before that, e.g. Ban Chiang, Ban Prasat, etc. can be covered with the archeological tags.