Tagging of Pās: fortification_type=pa instead of historic=pa


I noted that most of New Zealand’s pās are currently tagged historic=pa, while only some are tagged historic=archaeological_site:

historic = pa
site_type = fortification

The result is that with all the pās tagged historic=pa, the subordinate tagging with site_type=fortification is not functional. Also, all these pās are not being rendered e.g. on Carto.

To solve this issue, I suggest to instead use the specific value fortification_type=pa and tagging pās like this:

historic = archaeological_site
archaeological_site = fortification
fortification_type = pa

(site_type= is deprecated and should be replaced by archaeological_site=).

What do you think?

No it should not “be replaced”. See here, and the following discussion.

You are involved in a series of “tag changing adventures” that have already been reverted once where someone previously cocked it up. You’ve offered to pick up that work after the previous editor’s errors. Thanks for that, but I would strongly suggest that you complete the jobs that you have started before embarking on other adventures elsewhere.

Data consumers who are interested in this data are presumably just fine with the way it is right now. If mappers mapping new features want to describe it in the new way that people have invented rather than the way that everyone has previously done it, fine - data consumers will deal with it, as they always do.

1 Like

Hi, there are only a few active OSM contributors in New Zealand, previously the best way to contact everyone has been via the talk-nz mailing list. So far, I can only see 1 other post related to NZ on this new forum.

Personally, I think historic=archaeological_site + ????_type=fortification + fortification_type=pa is the best way of tagging a pā.

historic=pa was invented by the LINZ import in ca. 2009, back when there was no established tagging system (fortification_type had under 100 uses and wasn’t documented until 2017).

There are many other invented tags from the original LINZ import that have been converted to standardized tags over the past 5-10 years. EDIT: Here’s a wiki page with the full list. A few of us have already started changing historic=pa to historic=archaeological_site on a small scale.

I see no reason why we couldn’t upgrade the tags here, but it would be important to discuss this on talk-nz first, in case anyone is consuming historic=pa. It doesn’t look like Te Reo Māori Web Map | The Map Kiwi is using historic=pa although it does seem to use amenity=marae

1 Like

The transition from site_type= to archaeological_site= for archaeological sites tagged historic=archaeological_site is now completed.
It does not include historic=pa so far.

In addition to the issues mentioned in my original post above, this transition makes pās lose their common tag with other archaeological sites in OSM.

I asked the NZ community on talk-nz tonight for their input if to change the tagging scheme as suggested above. Thanks for pointing me there, @_️.

With all voices on the talk-nz mailing list in favour, I will now adjust the tagging of pās as outlined above.

It would be helpful to spell out exactly what tag combinations you’re going to change and to what, rather than a handwavy “as outlined above”.

An overpass query that outlines exactly what is going to be changed would be great too.

Completed. For the details, see the documentation on the wiki.

That contains " The remaining ca. 80 objects tagged historic = pa but NOT site_type = fortification I checked and adjusted manually.". It’s worth expanding on that, perhaps with an example, showing how you checked and what changes you made.

In New Zealand, those were pās as well, which I re-tagged accordingly. Half a dozen in the US and Europe seemed to be typos of possibly historic = path, which - making not much sense - I removed.