<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">13 dec. 2020 kl. 11:40 skrev stevea <<a href="mailto:steveaOSM@softworkers.com" class="">steveaOSM@softworkers.com</a>>:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta charset="UTF-8" class=""><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">Thank you, Ture: an excellent example and a great brief overview. From my perspective (if I were more of an OSM beginner), I might ask about the example of "torp:" might creating a tag like building=torp seem like it's on a good track? Maybe not, as the value is a Swedish word, but there is an historical cognate in British English (more OSM-like for tagging purposes) of "thorpe" (maybe with an e at the end, maybe not) which came from, but doesn't really mean the same thing all by itself in English,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>In many cases, the buildings are long gone and just the name remains. I *thought* that those places were still labelled in upright letters in the ”official” maps, but it turns out that I was wrong — in the present-day online-only version of those maps, those names that have lost their buildings have turned italic. Which is good for us, because it means we could still map building=torp where there actually is a building, and something else (historic=torp? historic=farm, farm=torp?) where there isn’t. :)</div><div><br class=""></div><br class=""></body></html>