[Tagging] Vacant shop tagging...

Craig Wallace craigw84 at fastmail.fm
Thu Aug 19 03:35:09 BST 2010

On 16/08/2010 11:11, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2010/8/16 Craig Wallace<craigw84 at fastmail.fm>:
>> On 15/08/2010 22:30, John Smith wrote:
>>> I'm not sure this is the best way to do things, what do others think?
>> If its vacant, then its not a shop, so shouldn't be tagged as such.
> IMHO a shop is a shop because it is officially commercial space (and
> not residential), it has a separate entrance (usually from the
> street), it has appropriate windows, etc. Of course there might be
> exceptions, but I think you get it.

I disagree. A shop is by definition a place selling products or 
services. And if its empty its not doing that.
Yes, it might still be commercial space, so within an area of 
landuse=retail or whatever, but its not a shop.

>> ie use a separate namespace, so tag it something like disused:shop=yes
>> Then it can be easily ignored by applications that just want to show
>> currently existing shops, or rendered differently etc.
> that's a good idea as well, and very versatile.

Yes, plus it would allow tagging other disused things. eg 
disused:amenity= for things like cafes, pubs, postboxes, phoneboxes etc, 
which I think would be useful.
Or you could tag what sort of disused shop it is (or was). eg 
disused:shop=supermarket or whatever.

More information about the Tagging mailing list