Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
fi67

Austrian and Swiss National Heritage Sites

21 posts in this topic

I've been discussing this with luzzi1971 and we came to the conclusion that it makes sense to create a combined category for Austrian and Swiss Heritage Sites. Both are small countries, mainly in the Alps with a German speaking majority. Even more both countries have chosen a very similar approach to publish their data of national heritage sites in the web. Liechtenstein is in between our countries and so small, so we decided to take it with us as well.

 

Here is our first proposal. Tell us what you think!

 

And we are looking for one or two active waymarkers who are interested in becoming officers of this category. I don't want to sound discriminating, but in this case I would prefer someone with knowledge in German :) .

 

 

Austrian and Swiss National Heritage Sites.

 

English:

 

Description:

To find and document locations that are officially listed by the respective authorities in Austria, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.

 

We are interested in permanent and immobile sites, some of the lists contain collections like libraries, archives, church treasuries or museum collections. These entries are excluded.

 

Expanded Description:

 

The aim of this category is to find and document the officially listed cultural heritage sites in Austria, Liechtenstein and Switzerland.

 

The official lists of protected heritage sites in Austria, Liechtenstein and Switzerland are available on the web sites of the respective authorities:

 

Austria: Bundesdenkmalamt (http://www.bda.at/downloads/2032/Denkmalverzeichnis)

Liechtenstein: Hochbauamt

(http://www.llv.li/amtsstellen/llv-hba-denkmalpflege_und_archaeologie/llv-hba-denkmalpflege_und_archaeologie-denkmalpflege/llv-hba-denkmalpflege_und_archaeologie-denkmalpflege-verzeichnis_der_geschuetzen_kulturdenkmaeler.htm)

Switzerland: Bundesamtes für Bevölkerungsschutz

(http://www.bevoelkerungsschutz.admin.ch/internet/bs/de/home/themen/kgs/kgs_inventar/a-objekte.html)

(http://www.bevoelkerungsschutz.admin.ch/internet/bs/de/home/themen/kgs/kgs_inventar/b-objekte.html)

 

There is a list for each Bundesland in Austria. The lists only contain immobile objects. This sums up to about 12,000 locations on 9 lists.

 

Switzerland has two lists for each canton according to the priority of the objects called A and B objects. There are currently about 8,300 entries in 52 lists.

 

The list of Liechtenstein contains about 200 objects.

 

The lists of Austria and Switzerland are available as PDF documents. Some regions provide more details on the official web sites.

 

Posting Instructions:

 

Provide the coordinates taken by you on the site.

Provide at least two daylight photos taken by yourself, for more complex sites with several buildings more pictures are appropriate.

Describe the object and its history; include as many information as you can get into the long description. Citations are allowed, but must be declared as such.

Fill out the variables as good as you can.

 

Naming convention for the title: Name (try to find something useful and unique for the closer area) - City, State, Country

 

Multilingual submissions are highly welcome but not absolutely required. Ideally we would like to see texts in English and the local predominant language (German in most areas, French or Italian in some Swiss regions).

 

Visiting instructions

 

To log a visit, please post a photo of the location you took yourself. Pictures of yourself and/or your GPS are NOT required, not even very welcome. Tell us about your visit. If you cannot provide a photo your visit will still be welcome, but then tell us a bit more, please.

 

Deutsch

 

Description:

Findet und dokumentiert denkmalgeschützte Orte in Österreich, Liechtenstein und der Schweiz.

 

Es geht um permanente, unbewegliche Objekte. Einige der Listen enthalten auch Sammlungen, z.b. aus Bibliotheken, Archiven, Kirchenschätzen und Museen, solche Einträge gehören nicht hierher.

 

Expanded Description:

 

Das Ziel dieser Kategorie ist, denkmalgeschützte Orte in Österreich, Liechtenstein und der Schweiz zu finden und zu dokumentieren.

 

Die offiziellen Listen der denkmalgeschützten Objekte in Österreich, Liechtenstein und der Schweiz sind auf den Web Sites der jeweiligen Behörden zu finden:

 

Österreich: Bundesdenkmalamt (http://www.bda.at/downloads/2032/Denkmalverzeichnis)

Liechtenstein: Hochbauamt

(http://www.llv.li/amtsstellen/llv-hba-denkmalpflege_und_archaeologie/llv-hba-denkmalpflege_und_archaeologie-denkmalpflege/llv-hba-denkmalpflege_und_archaeologie-denkmalpflege-verzeichnis_der_geschuetzen_kulturdenkmaeler.htm)

Schweiz: Bundesamtes für Bevölkerungsschutz

(http://www.bevoelkerungsschutz.admin.ch/internet/bs/de/home/themen/kgs/kgs_inventar/a-objekte.html)

(http://www.bevoelkerungsschutz.admin.ch/internet/bs/de/home/themen/kgs/kgs_inventar/b-objekte.html)

 

In Österreich gibt es für jedes Bundesland eine eigene Liste. Die Listen enthalten nur immobile Objekte. Zurzeit sind dies etwa 12'000 Orte in 9 Listen.

 

In der Schweiz gibt es zwei Listen für jeden Kanton (A- und B-Objekte je nach Wichtigkeit). Das ergibt etwa 8'300 Objekte in 52 Listen.

 

Lieschtenstein verfügt zur Zeit über etwa 200 denkmalgeschützte Objekte.

 

Die Listen für Österreich und die Schweiz sind als PDF-Dokumente verfügbar. z.T. gibt es detailliertere Informationen auf den Web Sites der einzelnen Bundesländer/Kantone.

 

Posting Instructions:

 

Die Koordinaten müssen selbst vor Ort erhoben werden.

Es sollten mindestens zwei verschiedene selbstgemachte Fotos des Objekts hochgelanden werden, bitte keine Nachtaufnahmen. Für komplexere Objekte mit mehreren Gebäuden sind mehr Bilder angebracht.

Beschreibt das Objekt und seine Geschichte. Je mehr Informationen, desto besser. Zitate sind erlaubt, müssen aber klar als solche gekennzeichnet und mit Quellenangaben versehen sein.

Füllt die Variablen so gut es geht aus.

 

Namenskonventionen für den Titel: Name (versucht etwas klares zu finden, das in der näheren Umgebung eindeutig ist) - Stadt, Bundesland oder Kanton, Land

 

Mehrsprachige Postings sind höchst willkommen, aber nicht unbedingt notwendig. Ideal wären Englisch und die lokal vorherrschende Landessprache (meistens Deutsch, in einigen Gegenden der Schweiz Französisch und Italienisch).

 

Visiting instructions

 

Bitte posted ein Foto, das ihr selbst gemacht habt. Bilder von Euch selbst und/oder eurem GPS nicht NICHT notwendig, nicht einmal besonders willkommen. Erzählt uns etwas von eurem Besuch. Falls Ihr kein Foto habt, könnt ich trotzdem einen Besuch loggen, aber dann möchten wir bitte ein bisschen mehr Text sehen.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Just a tiny bit of constructive feedback:

 

Very well written description!

 

I find the following statement a bit concerning. Why do you want to be so strict on visit photos? Many visit photos are taken during vacations, which often (not always) means people are in them.

Pictures of yourself and/or your GPS are NOT required, not even very welcome.

 

Excellent job on the write-up. My one small criticism won't keep me from voting YES on this great category idea.

0

Share this post


Link to post

An excellent observation, thank you!

 

I started this phrase with GPS pictures in mind only and then extended it. I really did not intend to discourage vacation pictures. I will re-write this phrase.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Good idea! Very simular to our German monument Registers category which is a cool category.

I'm interested to become an officer in that category.

0

Share this post


Link to post

You're welcome!

 

No other comments? Can I interpret this as affirmation or not?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Good idea! Very simular to our German monument Registers category which is a cool category.

I checked one of the Austrian lists and it looks similar to the German Denkmallists: many interesting objects, but also "powertrails" like 10 or more Buergerhausen on the same street. Please consider grouping similar objects in one location into one waymark - check the current page in the German category to see what I mean.

0

Share this post


Link to post

When the responsible persons decide to list the buildings individually then I am sure they have a reason to do so.

 

Some very old towns have a lot of listed buildings close together. This is not perfect from a Waymarking point of view, but acceptable. Most of the lists that I checked were very selective.

0

Share this post


Link to post

That's fine if the buildings have an unique architecture or history - but is it really necessary to have the buildings in Wien, Woinovichgasse 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10-12, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16-18-20, 17, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32 and 34 listed as individual waymarks? Each of them has an individual object number, they have been designed in similar style by about 5 different architectors during the Werkbundsiedlung project.

 

(I used this page at AleXXw's Tools Denkmalliste site)

0

Share this post


Link to post

This is indeed a lot, some kind of grouping could be a solution. I am discussing this with the other officers for the details.

 

I spotted something else I would like to discuss. There are two additional resources added to the Swiss A lists I am not sure how to deal with.

 

One is UNESCO World Heritage Sites in Switzerland. They are also included in the lists and clearly declared with the UNESCO logo. They have their own category. Should they be excluded? As there are currently less than a dozen of those, I would prefer to treat them as normal list entries for the sake of simplicity.

 

The other one is a special list called ISOS. This list is maintained by a different department than the rest, but the entries are included into the A object lists. ISOS objects are whole municipalities that are listed for their special overall impression. It can be a small hamlet or a city. What can we do with these?

 

I had the idea of including only those that have no regular item in the list, this would add some very picturesque little villages and prevent additional submissions for larger towns where already a number of buildings are listed. This would be the optimal solution regarding the outcome, but maybe make the instructions too complex and confusing. What do you think? Include all? Exclude all?

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm no friend of such 'powertrails'! But how would you group??

The goal of this category is to waymark ALL the objects on those lists, isn't it? So it should not be forbidden to waymark ALL of them.

But it's in the hands of each waymarker what he's going to waymatk and what he won't.

In the corresponding German catergory we have some small powertrails. I don't like them and I would never post them. I allways select the objects I waymark by a personal choise.

But everyone plays the game in his personal way.

 

So I wouldn't exclude this 'powertrails'.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I don't thinking grouping is a good idea. Just like on the US National Register of Historic Places there will be places with several in close proximity of each other. The waymarker did not decide what was put on the list the listing authority decided what was historically significant to make the list. If listing authority decided it significant enough to be listed then why should that be doubted and somehow decided that it is somehow less significant because there are several buildings that are significant nearby.

 

I don't know if on these listings if there are levels with say level 1 being the most significant and level 2 be lower or something, then you might require the listing to be only those listed at the more significant level. This would probably spread things out.

Edited by BruceS
0

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know about NRHP but these European lists were not created as "lists of interesting objects" - they are primarily lists of historical objects under special protection. If you own a house which is on that list, you can't perform any construction works or repairs on it without a permission from the Conservation Office (or whatever it is called). So naturally there will be similar houses in a row on one street, but it doesn't mean that each of them is worth a visit - the example I gave above could be posted eg. as "Werkbundsiedlung Residential Buildings - Woinovichgasse, Wien, Austria" with photos of several buildings.

 

BTW that AleXXw's site is great source not only for this category, I'll check it when I'll plan my next trip to Austria.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Really a great site. I'll have to bookmark AleXXw's site.

 

The same page from AleXXw's site you are referring to has also three other residential complexes similar to the Werkbundsiedlung, but they are grouped and have one single entry: "Malfattisiedlung", "Gemeindesiedlung Lockerwiese" and "Siedlung Lainz-Speising und Künstlersiedlung".

 

The creators of these list do have the possibility to create grouped entries and they also use it. So I guess there must be a reason to list the buildings of Werkbundsiedlung individually.

 

As far as I have seen, in Switzerland and Austria are much less of these "power trails" than in Bavaria, there are some, but not in significant quantities. So I think we can leave this part as it was. It keeps the posting instructions easier, as well as category management.

 

Any thoughts on the ISOS issue?

0

Share this post


Link to post

@ISOS: In basic I think: What is on the list can be waymarked in the category. But it does not make much sence to waymark a whole old town of a city.

On the other hand, I have an UNESCO heritage waymark for the whole old town of Regensburg, Germany. And this one is great. And some waymarkers have visited it. So why not?

 

Someone with professional knowlege made this lists. So I think they know what they did und why they did so.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I've been discussing this with luzzi1971 and we came to the conclusion that it makes sense to create a combined category for Austrian and Swiss Heritage Sites. Both are small countries, mainly in the Alps with a German speaking majority. Even more both countries have chosen a very similar approach to publish their data of national heritage sites in the web. Liechtenstein is in between our countries and so small, so we decided to take it with us as well.

 

There is a list for each Bundesland in Austria. The lists only contain immobile objects. This sums up to about 12,000 locations on 9 lists.

 

Switzerland has two lists for each canton according to the priority of the objects called A and B objects. There are currently about 8,300 entries in 52 lists.

 

The list of Liechtenstein contains about 200 objects.

 

 

I'm not sure that combining three countries in one category is a good idea. 12,000 is enough to sustain a category, and so is 8,300. I don't know about Liechtenstein. Maybe Switzerland can adopt it. I think keeping separate categories for each country keeps a clear focus. Even though there is a commonality of language and proximity of geography, I would find it confusing, and the identity is just blurred.

 

Just something to think about. Obviously it is your perspective that is important, and I think the community would support the direction you choose for this.

 

And, I do have reservations about grouping things on a list, unless they are listed as a group. The U.S. Historical Districts do this. A district may have 3 - 3,000 or more buildings. The district is ONE waymark. Then we have a separate category where each individual qualifying building, structure and object may be individually waymarked. Again, whatever makes the most sense under the listing structure of your respective countries is the main consideration.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not sure that combining three countries in one category is a good idea. 12,000 is enough to sustain a category, and so is 8,300. I don't know about Liechtenstein. Maybe Switzerland can adopt it. I think keeping separate categories for each country keeps a clear focus. Even though there is a commonality of language and proximity of geography, I would find it confusing, and the identity is just blurred.

 

Just something to think about. Obviously it is your perspective that is important, and I think the community would support the direction you choose for this.

 

All in all I share your opinion. With one exception. For the categories that are not global, like Historic Sites, Benchmarks, Post Offices, we have to split the world into smaller parts. Countries and states are the most obvious next sub-division, but sometimes there are other possible combinations that are widely known and can make more sense, especially when smaller areas are involved. Everyone knowns what Scandinavia is, or Central America, or New England. So this kind of grouping is viable I think provided the structures are compatible.

 

This is the case here; both countries have a federal structure. Bundesland and Canton are the same as the US states, they have their own government, laws, police and also conservation offices. So both countries do not provide a centralized list; it was not about grouping two entities, it was about combining two small groups into a larger one. I probably would not have supported a combined category for Post Offices or Benchmarks in the two countries, because there the situation is different.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The category in in Peer Review now. Wish us luck!

0

Share this post


Link to post

Peer review has ended over a week ago and nothing has happened since then. I have tried to contact Checkmark to look into this issue, but not received an answer yet.

 

I don't remember ever having seen a category take so long. Do you have an idea what I could do to speed up the process?

0

Share this post


Link to post

I waited about three weeks for the result of the 'German Monument Register' category. (Groundspeak moved to the new office in that time)

Perhaps Sean and Nate are on vacation ;)

I think everything is fine.

Cheers lumbricus

0

Share this post


Link to post

Peer review has ended over a week ago and nothing has happened since then. I have tried to contact Checkmark to look into this issue, but not received an answer yet.

 

I don't remember ever having seen a category take so long. Do you have an idea what I could do to speed up the process?

 

My apologies. I have dealt with my backlog.

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

My apologies. I have dealt with my backlog.

Heritage sites do not tend to go away quickly. So there is no need to hurry :D

 

The category is now approved and active. Thank you for all these positive feedbacks!

 

I invite all traveling waymarkers who have visited our countries in the recent past to check if they have something to cross-post. I am sure there must be many.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1