Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging redevelopment and closed roads

2016-09-21 Thread Lester Caine 
On 20/09/16 21:14, Steve Doerr wrote:
> On 20/09/2016 10:38, Derick Rethans wrote:
> 
>> If the items no longer function as how they are described, and not will
>> come back, I would delete them right away.
> 
> I disagree. Any feature in the landscape should remain mapped until it
> has actually disappeared. In the mean time, the 'disused:' namespace or
> similar should be used/

This is where the transfer to an historic record still needs to be
automated, but more difficult is where the roads are simply being
relocated and while currently they are closed to traffic, they will
reopen again once work is completed. Simply wiping an area and starting
again with a clean sheet is losing useful material which HAS been fully
mapped already.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging redevelopment and closed roads

2016-09-20 Thread Steve Doerr 

On 20/09/2016 10:38, Derick Rethans wrote:


If the items no longer function as how they are described, and not will
come back, I would delete them right away.


I disagree. Any feature in the landscape should remain mapped until it 
has actually disappeared. In the mean time, the 'disused:' namespace or 
similar should be used/


--
Steve

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging redevelopment and closed roads

2016-09-20 Thread Stuart Reynolds 
OK, thanks for your help on this. I’ve ended up with a combination that seemed 
most sensible:

 - the two car parks I have tagged with removed:amenity and removed:parking, 
because they are gone.
 - Norman Street (and the gyratory roads around the car parks) I have tagged 
with access=no, but not added any removed tags yet. The roads are only just 
shut, and I imagine that they won’t be “removed” for a while yet. I will add 
removed tags later. These roads are going, and never coming back.
 - Oxford Street I have added “motor_vehicle=no” because this is still open to 
pedestrians, and will be retained when the development has finished.

Thanks.

Regards,
Stuart Reynolds
for traveline south east & anglia



On 20 Sep 2016, at 15:06, m...@chrisfleming.org 
wrote:

On 20/09/16 at 11:28am, Donald wrote:
  If a building or road is removed, and nothing has replaced it, then i
  think it is good to have some sort of lifestyle prefix like
  demolished:building or removed:road, especially as they are usually still
  visible from aerial images.

  I have also used highway=no not:name= for the ITO analysis.

  Once the new development goes in these can and should probably be deleted.

Worth adding the main advantage of this, is if an armchair mapper comes
along tracing, then it *should* be obvious to them that those items no
longer exist and have been deliberatly removed.

Cheers
Chris


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

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging redevelopment and closed roads

2016-09-20 Thread me 
On 20/09/16 at 11:28am, Donald wrote:
>If a building or road is removed, and nothing has replaced it, then i
>think it is good to have some sort of lifestyle prefix like
>demolished:building or removed:road, especially as they are usually still
>visible from aerial images.
> 
>I have also used highway=no not:name= for the ITO analysis.
> 
>Once the new development goes in these can and should probably be deleted.

Worth adding the main advantage of this, is if an armchair mapper comes
along tracing, then it *should* be obvious to them that those items no
longer exist and have been deliberatly removed.

Cheers
Chris 


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging redevelopment and closed roads

2016-09-20 Thread Dan S 
2016-09-20 10:38 GMT+01:00 Derick Rethans :
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Stuart Reynolds wrote:
>
>> There are some major redevelopment works just starting in central
>> Lincoln. The old bus station has closed, and a number of streets and
>> car parks between it and the rail station are now shut for the
>> construction of the new transport hub. In the meantime, there is a
>> temporary bus station to the south of the station.
>>
>> To reflect all of this, I need to tag the affected roads, car parks,
>> and existing bus stops. I’m sure that the wrong thing to do would be
>> to simply delete everything that is soon to depart - although if
>> anything is most likely to want deleting it is the old bus stops - but
>> what is the right way? Tagging the roads as access=no is simple
>> enough, with a note, because I’m not sure (yet) of the end status. But
>> is there a preferred way, and what about the car parks and the old bus
>> station? How should that be dealt with.
>
> If the items no longer function as how they are described, and not will
> come back, I would delete them right away. It makes no sense to have
> "broken" objects in the database. And then add "landuse=construction"
> around the area.
>
> If it's temporary, then... "it depends". access=no works for the roads.
> Not sure about other clever tags :-)

Generic advice would be to choose some useful "lifecycle prefix":
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

I guess you could prepend "construction:" or "disused:" onto objects
that were _temporarily_ unavailable. I'm no expert on what's best
there though.

You can also prepend "demolished:" or "removed:" for things that are
actually gone - there was a discussion about a month ago on this list,
where the idea came up to do this kind of tagging as a precursor to
actually deleting the item from the database. This might seem a bit
weird but I like the idea that it makes it clear, in a
machine-readable way, exactly why the objects are deleted from the db.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging redevelopment and closed roads

2016-09-20 Thread Derick Rethans 
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Stuart Reynolds wrote:

> There are some major redevelopment works just starting in central 
> Lincoln. The old bus station has closed, and a number of streets and 
> car parks between it and the rail station are now shut for the 
> construction of the new transport hub. In the meantime, there is a 
> temporary bus station to the south of the station.
> 
> To reflect all of this, I need to tag the affected roads, car parks, 
> and existing bus stops. I’m sure that the wrong thing to do would be 
> to simply delete everything that is soon to depart - although if 
> anything is most likely to want deleting it is the old bus stops - but 
> what is the right way? Tagging the roads as access=no is simple 
> enough, with a note, because I’m not sure (yet) of the end status. But 
> is there a preferred way, and what about the car parks and the old bus 
> station? How should that be dealt with.

If the items no longer function as how they are described, and not will 
come back, I would delete them right away. It makes no sense to have 
"broken" objects in the database. And then add "landuse=construction" 
around the area.

If it's temporary, then... "it depends". access=no works for the roads. 
Not sure about other clever tags :-)

cheers,
Derick___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Tagging redevelopment and closed roads

2016-09-19 Thread Stuart Reynolds 
Hi All,

There are some major redevelopment works just starting in central Lincoln. The 
old bus station has closed, and a number of streets and car parks between it 
and the rail station are now shut for the construction of the new transport 
hub. In the meantime, there is a temporary bus station to the south of the 
station.

To reflect all of this, I need to tag the affected roads, car parks, and 
existing bus stops. I’m sure that the wrong thing to do would be to simply 
delete everything that is soon to depart - although if anything is most likely 
to want deleting it is the old bus stops - but what is the right way? Tagging 
the roads as access=no is simple enough, with a note, because I’m not sure 
(yet) of the end status. But is there a preferred way, and what about the car 
parks and the old bus station? How should that be dealt with.

Many thanks

Regards,
Stuart Reynolds
for traveline south east & anglia



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