What you're proposing seems to be geared towards an automatic script to change tags based on change* keys. I think it's simpler to have a single key, and then add a note=* so future mappers can intelligently decide whether to change things. -Josh
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Flaimo <fla...@gmail.com> wrote: > i think that is to vague. a user should have an idea, what happens, > when he uses the tag. "reinsprect" can mean everything from "it will > be deleted" to "nice, but nobody is going to touch this". > > also for finished constructions i wouldn't invent a new tag. if the > construction is estimated to be finished in 2 months, i would just add > a grace period of one additional month and then use > "change:highway=<Date>;residential" to change the currenten value from > "construction" to "residential" > > flaimo > >> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 16:43:03 -0400 >> From: Richard Welty <rwe...@averillpark.net> >> To: tagging@openstreetmap.org >> Subject: Re: [Tagging] your opinion on a delete/change key >> Message-ID: <4da8add7.1000...@averillpark.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> On 4/15/11 4:18 PM, Josh Doe wrote: >>> I'm not sure if I'd call it delete, maybe something more verbose and >>> general like "reinspect_date". This would be useful for some highway >>> construction projects I've added which have given an estimated date of >>> completion. >> yes, reinspect_date might be useful. although there might be other >> types of date, so maybe >> >> date:reinspect >> date:projected:construction_end >> > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
