[Talk-GB] Disused or empty apartments prior to demolition

[Warin]

My understanding?


If the feature is disused then place disused: in front of the existing tag;

so
building=apartments
becomes
disused:building=apartments

or
building=yes
becomes
disused:building=yes

....
Having both disused:building=* and disused:building=* is a conflict, it 
is disused or not?

OSM does not map history, the past use of a building is not what 'we' 
map. OSM does map what the building 'looks' like - apartments, church, 
post office etc. Using the disused: tag does not change this, but adds 
the information that it is presently disused.

On 18/12/19 03:58, Silent Spike wrote:
> The `building` tag actually specifies the original purpose or form of 
> the building - it just happens that this usually aligns with the 
> current use. As such, I think it's fine to leave them tagged as 
> `building=apartments`.
>
> See: 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:use. Interestingly 
> that wiki page points to the lifecycle prefix page for the case of 
> disused buildings, but I'd say feel free to use `building:use=disused` 
> to explicitly tag them for future mappers to see.
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 3:22 PM Jez Nicholson <jez.nicholson at gmail.com 
> <mailto:jez.nicholson at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Change it to building=yes + disused:building=apartments ?...it's
>     still a building, but the original use is now disused?
>
>     - Jez
>
>     On Tue, 17 Dec 2019, 14:51 Gareth L, <o.i at live.co.uk
>     <mailto:o.i at live.co.uk>> wrote:
>
>         There are some tower blocks near me which have been emptied of
>         residents ahead of eventual demolition of the buildings.
>         They’re not coming back into use due to issues with their
>         construction.
>         http://www.mapillary.com/map/im/lzDlWfY8iYo2cUVmO1FNmQ/photo They’re
>         boarded up to secure them in the interim.
>
>         All the guidance I can find on the abandoned or disused tags
>         are to leave the building as defined but to use
>         abandoned/disused prefix on the amenity.
>
>         These didn’t have an amenity though. They do still exist on
>         the ground, but no longer function as apartments.
>
>         I’d like to use construction style tagging, but it doesn’t
>         feel quite right looking at all examples I’ve found. e.g.
>         Building=disused
>         Disused=apartments
>
>         What have you used for buildings which are awaiting
>         demolition, or are undergoing a protracted demolition process
>         but are not amenities?
>
>         Gareth
>         _______________________________________________
>         Talk-GB mailing list
>         Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Talk-GB mailing list
>     Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20191218/f52e011b/attachment-0001.html>