<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">27 Sep 2019, 01:37 by graemefitz1@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div class=""><div class="" dir="ltr">On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 02:52, Kevin Kenny <<a href="mailto:kevin.b.kenny@gmail.com" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">kevin.b.kenny@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class=""><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">I've also mapped things like 'disused:amenity=prison<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"> landuse=brownfield' for a now-closed prison that the state is trying<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"> to find a buyer to redevelop. The buildings are still standing (and I<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"> understand are for the most part structurally sound), but what would a<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"> buyer do with them?<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Legal offices would seem the most appropriate? :-) <br></div><div><br></div><div>Going back to the disused / abandoned discussion, is this a good time to ask about destroyed:?<br></div><div><br></div><div>A tourism establishment in our area has just been destroyed by a bushfire :-( <br></div><div><br></div><div>It's planned to rebuild on the same spot, so I've marked the existing tourism=guest_house & amenity=restaurant tags as destroyed:, together with a "description" note. This has removed them from the map. Is that the right way of doing it?<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div style="16px" text-align="left">It seems ok to me. Updated maps will<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">show current situation, reduced chance<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">for armchair mappers to map it from <br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">aerial images.</div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="ltr"><div class=""><div><br></div><div>The associated camping ground wasn't damaged in any way (beyond losing power & telephone lines) but is also temporarily closed for "a while" pending road repairs & re-connection of power etc.<br></div><div><br></div><div>What's the best way of marking that? <br></div></div></div></blockquote><div style="16px" text-align="left">Lifecycle prefixes work better fine.<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">disused:leisure=* etc.<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">Though in case of things staying in this<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">state for years and without traces on the ground</div><div style="16px" text-align="left">I would delete them as gone.</div> </body>
</html>