Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bunkers

[Lionel Giard]

I was just following the wiki on that which says abandoned:building=bunker.
I suppose that they see it as the building is abandoned, so it is the
building that get the prefix. But i also thought like you at a first guess
(i just followed how it was done on the wiki blindly). :-) Thus maybe we
should change/propose a change on the wiki ?

Le mar. 17 mars 2020 à 20:25, Marc Gemis  a écrit :

> are you sure it's not
>
> building=bunker
> abandoned:military=bunker
>
> ?
>
> my reasoning is:  it's still a building, but no longer a military
> installation.
>
> m.
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 5:16 PM Lionel Giard 
> wrote:
> >
> > For abandonned (historic) military bunker, the correct mapping is :
> > - abandonned:building=bunker
> > - military=bunker
> > - bunker_type=* (most of them are pillbox for those defensive belt
> around our big cities)
> > - historic=yes
> > ...
> >
> > So that you get all the information that it is no longer in use ! ^_^
> > Look on the wiki for more detailed tagging:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:military%3Dbunker
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Lionel
> >
> > Le mar. 17 mars 2020 à 16:51, Marc M.  a
> écrit :
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Le 17.03.20 à 16:26, rodeo .be a écrit :
> >> > I assume they were not visible because the tags were deprecated
> >>
> >> military=bunker isn't deprecated, it's the correct tag for a bunker
> >> still in military use.
> >>
> >> I found at least one currently visible mapped with a node
> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/29049422
> >> another mapped with an area https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25586752
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Marc
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Talk-be mailing list
> >> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-be mailing list
> > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bunkers

[Marc Gemis]

are you sure it's not

building=bunker
abandoned:military=bunker

?

my reasoning is:  it's still a building, but no longer a military installation.

m.

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 5:16 PM Lionel Giard  wrote:
>
> For abandonned (historic) military bunker, the correct mapping is :
> - abandonned:building=bunker
> - military=bunker
> - bunker_type=* (most of them are pillbox for those defensive belt around our 
> big cities)
> - historic=yes
> ...
>
> So that you get all the information that it is no longer in use ! ^_^
> Look on the wiki for more detailed tagging:  
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:military%3Dbunker
>
> Kind Regards,
> Lionel
>
> Le mar. 17 mars 2020 à 16:51, Marc M.  a écrit :
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Le 17.03.20 à 16:26, rodeo .be a écrit :
>> > I assume they were not visible because the tags were deprecated
>>
>> military=bunker isn't deprecated, it's the correct tag for a bunker
>> still in military use.
>>
>> I found at least one currently visible mapped with a node
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/29049422
>> another mapped with an area https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25586752
>>
>> Regards,
>> Marc
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bunkers

[Karel Adams]

excuus voor de mierenneukerij, maar het is relevant, denk ik:

s/abandonned/abandoned/g

;)


On 2020-03-17 16:15, Lionel Giard wrote:

For abandonned (historic) military bunker, the correct mapping is :
- abandonned:building=bunker
- military=bunker
- bunker_type=* (most of them are pillbox for those defensive belt 
around our big cities)

- historic=yes
...

So that you get all the information that it is no longer in use ! ^_^
Look on the wiki for more detailed tagging: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:military%3Dbunker


Kind Regards,
Lionel

Le mar. 17 mars 2020 à 16:51, Marc M. > a écrit :


Hello,

Le 17.03.20 à 16:26, rodeo .be a écrit :
> I assume they were not visible because the tags were deprecated

military=bunker isn't deprecated, it's the correct tag for a bunker
still in military use.

I found at least one currently visible mapped with a node
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/29049422
another mapped with an area https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25586752

Regards,
Marc

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bunkers

[Marc M.]

Hello,

Le 17.03.20 à 16:26, rodeo .be a écrit :
> I assume they were not visible because the tags were deprecated

military=bunker isn't deprecated, it's the correct tag for a bunker
still in military use.

I found at least one currently visible mapped with a node
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/29049422
another mapped with an area https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25586752

Regards,
Marc

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

[OSM-talk-be] Bunkers

[rodeo .be]

Hey all,

I was driving around today, and saw some bunkers along the road that were
not visible on the map. But they were tagged on OSM ... already 11y ago
 ..

I assume they were not visible because the tags were deprecated. What are
the correct tags to give such a building? Are there other bunkers in
Belgium that were tagged 11y ago, but not visible because of "old tags"?

Kind regards
Maarten
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be