[Tagging] Status of building=stable

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Wed Oct 17 09:28:39 GMT 2012

2012/10/17 Martin Vonwald <imagic.osm at gmail.com>:
> You're right. I'll change the proposal in the following way:
> a) building=stable, no building:use: looks like a stable, used as a stable
> b) building=stable, building:use=<not stable>: looks like a stable,
> but used for something different
> c) building=<whatever>, building:use=stable: looks like <whatever>,
> but is used as stable
> I assume, that the majority of who used building=stable in the past
> meant "it is used as a stable".
> Better?

yes, this would be consistent (e.g. with how we handle churches). What
could be discussed is the choice of the key: whether a stable
(function) should be tagged with a building subtag like "building:use"
instead of using a "main" feature namespace like amenity or man_made
(i.e. man_made=stable) in a) and c).


More information about the Tagging mailing list