[Tagging] Landfills timespan

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> But does it belong in OSM? You need to provide a very strong argument to go against the maxims.

Agreed.

If you can verify the location of an abandoned landfill which is
overgrown, and you really want to map it, it would be best to use
abandoned:landuse=landfill

(If the landfill is merely disused, and is still visibly a landfill
from survey (or good aerial imagery) and might be reopened again, you
can still tag it as landuse=landfill + disused=yes, since it is still
visibly a landfill. This would be more verifiable)

- Joseph Eisenberg

On 2/20/20, Jez Nicholson <jez.nicholson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Lately in my area old landfills from the 60ies and 70ies have been
>> opened again for maintenance. They are forest by now but all trees have
>> been removed beforehand. So those landfills are now observable.
>
> Yes, you _could_ observe and map them now....and as soon as they cover them
> over again they are no longer observable and no longer applicable to OSM in
> the normal run of things.
>
> The data is great. Really useful. But does it belong in OSM? You need to
> provide a very strong argument to go against the maxims.
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:44 AM Martin Koppenhoefer
> <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Am Do., 20. Feb. 2020 um 11:34 Uhr schrieb Jez Nicholson <
>> jez.nicholson at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> in the UK at least, people just didn't keep records because "out of
>>> sight, out of mind".
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> that's what they tell you...
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>