Mapping and tagging in complex archaeological sites

When mapping complex archaeological sites, such as Tel Megiddo - a World Heritage Site, there is a need to map both the site in general, as an area, and specific locations within it.

It seems reasonable to me that the area is tagged as historic=archaeological_site.

When historic=archaeological_site tag is also used for nodes representing specific locations within the site, the result is a cluster of many archaeological sites within an archaeological site.

My questions are:

  1. What is the appropriate tagging for specific archaeological locations within a complex archaeological site?
  2. Is it appropriate to use a relation in order to associate the specific archaeological location nodes with the area way of the site in general?

A fascinating question: I dont have a good answer to this, other than look around the world to see how it’s been done elsewhere.

Here are a few examples:

Stonehenge area. A mix of individual features & collections of features mapped as archaelogical_site. In practice the whole area is one archaeological site and would benefit from a a cleaner hierarchy of tagging of the relevant finds.

Petra: a similar phenomenon

Delphi: a single archaeological_site with site:type tagging, but the boundary is not rendered. Ruined buildings mapped as buildings (building=yes, historic=ruins).

Macchu Picchu: mainly as a single site.

I think it may be worthwhile repeating this question on OSM Help. It may engender greater interest.

There is clearly scope to start working out a more systematic approach & any site where someone has good knowledge (and preferably convenient access) is a good place to refine the tagging.

Interestingly, in Machu Picchu, there is both an archaeological_site area, and an archaeological_site node.
The specific locations within the site are tagged with tourism=attraction.
The tourism=attraction tagging could be inappropriate for a complex archaeological site which is not a significant touristic attraction.

relation type=site

see Kloster Sankt Marienstern:

Grüße von Lutz

I don’t see a relation type=site there any more.
Do you know what happened?

For me it works, use Firefox.
What an operating system, browser do you use?