If there are no further objections, I would like to take a moment to summarize the key points once more.
The criteria for the ‘ceremonial gate’ key that I am confident about are as follows.
- It should either serve the purpose of, or originate from, the division between the sacred and the secular.
- It should not function as a gate for control (i.e., it should not have a door leaf or similar mechanism). : There is room for discussion
- It should be distinguished from a typical monument.
- It must feature an open structure. In other words, there should be no walls, or if there are, they should be low, and at least two sides should be open. : There is room for discussion
- It should not be a building in the general sense, nor should it be a part of a building. (This means that it should not be fully equipped with columns, walls, and a roof. Please note that this is not the same as the criteria for a ‘building’ in OpenStreetMap.)
- This should not have any primary purpose other than marking the boundary between the sacred and the profane or signaling ceremonial significance. In other words, it should not be primarily used for dwelling, resting, waiting, or shelter.
Please share your thoughts if there are any aspects of this discussion that may require further consideration or clarification.
If there are no significant objections to the previous discussions, I suggest that we proceed with the discussion by focusing on the reasoning supporting the combination of the criteria, as well as the arguments against it.