[Tagging] Historic tower
61sundowner at gmail.com
Mon Mar 23 22:15:39 UTC 2015
start_date ? start of planning?, construction? occupation?
completion of planning? construction? occupation?
built_data ... is fairly simple. I like simple and plain. It would need more words for structures that have several 'additions', 'refurbishments', etc .. but the meaning is more apparent than start_date and completion_date.
On 24/03/2015 8:43 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> Wouldn't it make much more sense to use start_date for the starting date, and completion_date for the completion date?
> On March 22, 2015 10:27:00 AM CDT, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Am 22.03.2015 um 15:39 schrieb fly <lowflight66 at googlemail.com>:
>>> but how to handle buildings which where finished after two/three
>> centuries ?
>> start_date according to the wiki is the completion date, or the date
>> when the feature became active. FWIW, buildings very often get
>> extended, changed, even rebuild, especially those that lasted for
>> centuries. We don't have an exact method to store this information in
>> OSM (and doing it would probably go beyond our scope and methods, even
>> a single wall will often be of different periods). You must see
>> start_date as an approximate method to give some indication (I
>> suggest to use the oldest start date in cases where the building has
>> undergone several building phases, or maybe the most significant if
>> nothing of the oldest building can be seen)
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging