[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - defensive structures

[Jeroen Hoek]

On 07-07-2021 05:35, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Should military=* be reserved for current military structures /
> facilities / establishments?

Introducing that principle would give this proposal a stronger raison
d'être and a clear cut-off line for tagging such structures: any disused
defensive structure becomes historic when no longer in active military
use. WWII bunkers in particular are confusing to tag now (although this
is done in a structured way), and military=bunker does feel a bit off
compared to other 'current function' tags like amenity=*, shop=*, etc.

Are there downsides to limiting military=* to active (or dormant)
military functions? Key:military already seems to hint that this should
be the case, so it doesn't seem to be much of a leap to emphasize that.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210707/e80be828/attachment.sig>