[talk-au] Maxar bushfire imagery

Sebastian S. mapping at consebt.de
Sat Jan 18 08:15:34 UTC 2020


I think the discussion regarding damaged is good, however I feel that this is a too fine grained quality for mapping from satellite images.

I would use ruined. Ruined can be fully destroyed or partially.

If damaged my next question would be how much? A little? Very subjective to quantify.



On 18 January 2020 9:34:58 am AEDT, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>On 17/1/20 10:08 pm, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 17 Jan 2020, 11:42 by andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com:
>>
>>     I'm all for using the lifecycle prefix,
>>     https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix. I agreed
>>     that if there's still remains there use ruined or destroyed, not
>>     sure what the difference is though.
>>
>> ruined implies that ruins still remain, destroyed may mean that or 
>> that there is no trace at all
>>
>> in practice difference is minor if any
>
>Most of these will still have foundations in place, they may not be fit
>
>for reuse but they are there. Some fire places and chimneys too remain.
>
>I'll use ruined. Unless there are other ideas?
>
>
>>     Once it's been cleared you could use demolished, removed or
>raised
>>
>> Probably razed, not raised. I see not real difference.
>>
>>     , again not sure what the difference is. While damaged is not
>>     documented it seems the perfect fit since there is no other
>>     suitable tag for this on the wiki.
>>
>> damaged seems to me a poor fit as prefix, damaged building is still a
>
>> building,
>> and I would expect building=something tag to be used.
>
>
>By damaged I mean part of the building is intact but another part has 
>been damaged .. e.g. a truck has run part way through the building.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20200118/ec6c8e02/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Talk-au mailing list