I understand your logic behind some of your tag changes and rearrangements, but I disagree on some.

The name fits a description better, true, but so are literally all the names of monuments, plaques and memorials. Very few memorials do have a "title" in it that is its official name. Many of those follow a scheme of "type of memorial + short description of it". Look around in OSM and you would see that the vast majority of memorials are mapped with a name, some may come from an official government memorial database.

Never heard anything about the -t- thing; but I personally still prefer ":translation:".

I think this will be an easier way for applications to drink this data easier, searching for "inscription:translation:XX" tags seems faster than deciphering "XX-t-XX" tags. This also is more clear to a human reading the tags that the contents are a translation to Spanish.

About the "source:inscription:es" tag, sorry, my mistake. The "source:inscription:es" tag confused me because the tag ends with a Spanish ":es", but the language in the value is Catalan. Your "source:inscription:es" should be "source:inscription:translation:es", because the original inscription is not in Spanish, only the translation is.

I'll revert the translation tag back to "inscription:translation:es", readd the name, move the source of the translation to "source:inscription:translation:es" and move the "inscription:translation:es:description:XX" to "description:XX".

I like the sound of "inscription:translation:es:description:ca" xDD and I would like to add it also, but I guess that description will be more used, so I'll go with that for now.