2009/10/21 Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com> > Anthony schrieb: > > Disused canal, fine. Disused railway, sure. Disused building, no > > problem. Disused quarry, yes. > > > > But disused cafe? A cafe is a building, or part of a building, which > > is *used* as a cafe. The use is part of the definition. > > Well, yes and no. > > People might remember that there once was a cafe. They might call the > building "the cafe" even if its no longer a cafe "in use". > > So this is what the mapper *may* wanted to express. While I don't think > the combination is well done, it but could well have its reasons. > > > However, > > This obviously doesn't work pretty well in the 4th dimension, if you > want to tag: this once was a cafe, before that a pub, before a bakery > and before that a police_station. > > > Another even simpler problem, if a node is tagged: > > shop=bakery > amenity=police_station > disused=yes > > disused refers to shop or amenity now? > > > Yes But,
If a Pub is tagged amenity=pub disused=yes The thing looks like a put (ie large pub like lables) hence works relatively well as a land mark, it just happens to be closed and does not sell Beer anymore. Its still useful if its a landmark. same as a disused mine shaft is. Once it gets knocked down, or reused, or as something else then the tags need changing. Peter
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk