[Tagging] Removing an ATM
61sundowner at gmail.com
Tue Jul 9 23:29:14 UTC 2019
On 10/07/19 00:42, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 09/07/2019 15:27, Paul Allen wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 15:10, Martin Koppenhoefer
>> <dieterdreist at gmail.com <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> sent from a phone
>> > On 9. Jul 2019, at 15:57, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com
>> <mailto:pla16021 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> > Where an object is no longer physically present, such as a
>> telephone booth that has
>> > been removed, then removed:amenity=telephone.
>> while disused and abandoned features make sense and can be
>> observed, may help for orientation or might be reactivated,
>> Not really. They don't get rendered (on standard carto).
> ... but depending on the feature, they may do elsewhere.
> I've no idea if anyone renders disused ATMs (I don't) but on cue I've
> just remembered and updated
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5179225222 rather than just
> removing it in case someone does. I'm sure it'll get reinstated at
> some point, and I'll change the tagging back. If the ATM had actually
> been removed I'd have just deleted it, but in this case it is still there
> Plenty of other "disused / no longer useful for the original purpose"
> are major landscape features that deserve to be recorded, and
> sometimes the best tag really is disused:foo=bar.
They form part of my navigational landscape.
E.g. a pub that has not been used for a century and falling down .. is
the only building for quite some distance. It is a navigational feature
that all recognise.
A path that is now overgrown .. yet going past it locates you on the
map, provided the map has it and you recognise it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging