[Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?
Warin
61sundowner at gmail.com
Thu Sep 26 23:46:14 UTC 2019
On 27/09/19 09:37, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 02:52, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com
> <mailto:kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
> I've also mapped things like 'disused:amenity=prison
> landuse=brownfield' for a now-closed prison that the state is trying
> to find a buyer to redevelop. The buildings are still standing (and I
> understand are for the most part structurally sound), but what would a
> buyer do with them?
>
>
> Legal offices would seem the most appropriate? :-)
Don't know if I'd use landuse=brownfield. Could the buildings be
re-purposed .. and therefore not a brownfield but a construction site?
>
> Going back to the disused / abandoned discussion, is this a good time
> to ask about destroyed:?
>
> A tourism establishment in our area has just been destroyed by a
> bushfire :-(
>
> It's planned to rebuild on the same spot, so I've marked the existing
> tourism=guest_house & amenity=restaurant tags as destroyed:, together
> with a "description" note. This has removed them from the map. Is that
> the right way of doing it?
>
> The associated camping ground wasn't damaged in any way (beyond losing
> power & telephone lines) but is also temporarily closed for "a while"
> pending road repairs & re-connection of power etc.
>
> What's the best way of marking that?
>
For something that can be made functional with a little work - disused:*
I'd add a description tag too.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190927/8637ed9b/attachment.html>
More information about the Tagging
mailing list