[Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED"

[Tobias Knerr]

On 30.01.2015 17:17, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
> The goal was to describe an allready in use practice about the removed:
> prefix which I thought defered from the destroyed: prefix which was intended
> for features that once were, but were destroyed, while the removed: prefix
> is a more generic case where some mapper discover on the ground that a real
> life object in fact does not exists

Looking at the taginfo pages for the removed:power key, which has been
quoted as an example of the practice, I notice that only 8 users have
last edited a feature with that tag. With removed:design, the number
even goes down to 1! Combined with the very limited geographical spread,
I strongly doubt that the removed: prefix is as commonly used as the
page suggests. So imo the page has no business being in the Key namespace.