Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

sent from a phone On 1. Oct 2019, at 16:07, Kevin Kenny wrote: >> The 6 papal basilicas are the 4 major basilicas in Rome plus 2 minor >> basilicas in Assisi. > Nitpick: 7. The minor basilica of San Lorenzo fuori le Mura in Rome is > also a papal basilica. it seems it was a patriarchal basi

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:26 AM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > actually St. Paul's does have walls, the name is "outside the walls" > intending outside the city walls. ;-) Yes. I know it has walls! 'Without the walls' is a traditional, literary translation for 'extra moenia' (which in turn is render

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 12:09, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: usually people will go by the name I think, if it is called "cathedral" > they will reasonably think it is a cathedral... > Many people, if they see the word cathedral on a map, will be looking for a building something like https://commons.

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

Am Mo., 30. Sept. 2019 um 17:03 Uhr schrieb Kevin Kenny < kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com>: > Examples: In Rome, St Peter's, St Mary Major, and St Paul's Without > the Walls are all basilicas, but none of these is a cathedral. actually St. Paul's does have walls, the name is "outside the walls" intendi

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

sent from a phone On 30. Sep 2019, at 16:49, Paul Allen wrote: Some denominations have strict ranks. Others are far more egalitarian. And what rank is the only place of worship of a very small denomination? the tag was introduced for those denominations where rank is well defined and importa

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 30. Sep 2019, at 14:02, Paul Allen wrote: > And then there are basilicas, both major and minor, which > rank higher than cathedrals. A basilica is a church that is formally designated as a place of pilgrimage. It doesn't rank 'higher' than a cathedral, although many basilicas are also cathedra

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 14:26, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > I have proposed a long time ago a tag religious_rank which was thought for > example as a modifier for places of worship and monsteries. It’s not > particularly popular, but it could be suitable for finer distinctions: > https://taginfo

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

sent from a phone > On 30. Sep 2019, at 14:02, Paul Allen wrote: > > And then there are basilicas, both major and minor, which > rank higher than cathedrals. yes, this is one meaning of the word basilica, especially in catholicism, there is also another, art historic one, which describes a

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 08:10, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > On 27. Sep 2019, at 13:52, Paul Allen wrote: > > > > Another counter-argument: we don't have any tag indicating residential > usage other > > than building=house > > we do, there are terrace, duplex, villa, apartments, caravan, detac

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 07:50, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > the point of tagging amenity and building independently is to distinguish > between structure and use/service > Some of us think that. Others think that building=yes|no are the only options. > > > Counter-argument: Christian > > plac

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

sent from a phone > On 27. Sep 2019, at 13:52, Paul Allen wrote: > > Many buildings that have distinctive styles have other tags indicating > their function, so the reasoning is that you don't need building=church if > you have > amenity=place_of_worship + religion=christian. there’s a dif

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

sent from a phone > On 27. Sep 2019, at 13:52, Paul Allen wrote: > > Another counter-argument: we don't have any tag indicating residential usage > other > than building=house we do, there are terrace, duplex, villa, apartments, caravan, detached and probably more. They are implying reside

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

sent from a phone > On 27. Sep 2019, at 13:52, Paul Allen wrote: > > Many buildings that have distinctive styles have other tags indicating > their function, so the reasoning is that you don't need building=church if > you have > amenity=place_of_worship + religion=christian. the point o

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 at 00:24, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27/09/19 21:52, Paul Allen wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 11:02, Marc Gemis wrote: > > so disused:amenity=pub ; building=pub (it looks like a pub); >> building:use=house (or is it :usage?) >> > > Erm, I can't think of any

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 27/09/19 21:52, Paul Allen wrote: On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 11:02, Marc Gemis > wrote: so disused:amenity=pub ; building=pub (it looks like a pub); building:use=house (or is it :usage?) Erm, I can't think of any pub I've ever been in or past that was in a

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 16:36, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > > > 27 Sep 2019, 15:22 by pla16...@gmail.com: > > On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 13:46, Mateusz Konieczny > wrote: > > 27 Sep 2019, 13:52 by pla16...@gmail.com: > > The status for that is "in use," which makes it a little questionable. > > Why?

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

27 Sep 2019, 15:22 by pla16...@gmail.com: > On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 13:46, Mateusz Konieczny <> matkoni...@tutanota.com > > > wrote: > >> 27 Sep 2019, 13:52 by >> pla16...@gmail.com >> : >> >>> we don't have any tag indicating residenti

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 13:46, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > 27 Sep 2019, 13:52 by pla16...@gmail.com: > > we don't have any tag indicating residential usage other > than building=house > > building:use=residential? > The status for that is "in use," which makes it a little questionable. It also ra

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

27 Sep 2019, 01:37 by graemefi...@gmail.com: > > > On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 02:52, Kevin Kenny <> kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > >> >> I've also mapped things like 'disused:amenity=prison >> landuse=brownfield' for a now-closed prison that the state is tr

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

27 Sep 2019, 13:52 by pla16...@gmail.com: > we don't have any tag indicating residential usage other > than building=house > building:use=residential?___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 11:02, Marc Gemis wrote: so disused:amenity=pub ; building=pub (it looks like a pub); > building:use=house (or is it :usage?) > Erm, I can't think of any pub I've ever been in or past that was in a building that could be described as looking like a pub. All but three or f

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 07:28, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > Pleased to see that Bessie's in the Gwaun Valley is still the same as ever > though! > You're cursed! Stay away from pubs anywhere near me! Bessie's has only just re-opened. https://www.tivysideadvertiser.co.uk/news/17784770.pembrokesh

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

>> A "find a pint of beer near me" app which does a proximity search >> for amenity=pub won't work very well if some of those pubs... aren't pubs. >> >> amenity=pub means "actually a pub", not "thing that looks like a pub". > > > Which is why, for this one, I used disused:amenity=pub. Which (curre

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

Paul Allen wrote: > Ummm, which pub in St Dogs? The Teifi Netpool Inn is more of a guest > house with a bar than a pub with guest rooms these days. The White > Hart closed but there's currently an attempt by locals to raise the > money to take it over. (One quick Google later...) Goodness me

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 27/09/19 02:15, Paul Allen wrote: On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 16:49, Richard Fairhurst > wrote: Paul Allen wrote: > BTW, that's on national cycle route 82, so whether or not it really is > a pub would be of interest to some mappers. Oh, has that cl

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 27/09/19 09:37, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 02:52, Kevin Kenny > wrote: I've also mapped things like 'disused:amenity=prison landuse=brownfield' for a now-closed prison that the state is trying to find a buyer to redevelop.

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 02:52, Kevin Kenny wrote: > > I've also mapped things like 'disused:amenity=prison > landuse=brownfield' for a now-closed prison that the state is trying > to find a buyer to redevelop. The buildings are still standing (and I > understand are for the most part structurally

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

I can think of at least two pubs in my stamping ground within The Shire which I have never set foot in as they closed before I moved there eight years ago. Both still look like pubs and display their name and look like pubs from a distance. Set to disused:amenity=pub. https://www.openstreetmap

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 19:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > One question is should they be rendered, and most > > people seem to agree that they should. Should the buildings be tagged > as disused? So > > the wiki implies. If they should be tagged (in some way) as disused, > then how? > >

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

sent from a phone > On 26. Sep 2019, at 19:18, Paul Allen wrote: > > One question is should they be rendered, and most > people seem to agree that they should. Should the buildings be tagged as > disused? So > the wiki implies. If they should be tagged (in some way) as disused, then > how

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 17:53, Markus wrote: > On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 18:43 Martin Koppenhoefer, > wrote: > >> an unused building remains a building, hence the building=* tag should be >> kept. >> > > All disused physical objects i can imagine remain physical objects. Are > you saying that we shoul

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:53 PM Markus wrote: > All disused physical objects i can imagine remain physical objects. Are you > saying that we shouldn't use disused: for physical objects? It's a grey area. A disused building is still a building. An abandoned building may be a pile of debris that'

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 18:43 Martin Koppenhoefer, wrote: > an unused building remains a building, hence the building=* tag should be > kept. > All disused physical objects i can imagine remain physical objects. Are you saying that we shouldn't use disused: for physical objects? ___

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:33 PM Paul Allen wrote: > Makes it explicit for somebody who goes to a pub guide website (there are > many), > spots this one then looks at OSM to find it. It's not a pub any more. > Otherwise it's possible > to conclude that somebody mapped the building outline but

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

Am Do., 26. Sept. 2019 um 18:37 Uhr schrieb Markus < selfishseaho...@gmail.com>: > On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 18:30 Andy Townsend, wrote: > >> On 26/09/2019 17:09, Markus wrote: >> > >> > Thus, those disused toilets could be tagged: >> > >> > disused:building=toilets >> > >> No, it's still a building.

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 18:30 Andy Townsend, wrote: > On 26/09/2019 17:09, Markus wrote: > > > > Thus, those disused toilets could be tagged: > > > > disused:building=toilets > > > No, it's still a building. Yes, it's still a building (a toilets hut), but it (currently) has no use. ___

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 17:14, Andy Townsend wrote: > > > https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=20&lat=52.0802094&lon=-4.660442 > > Works for me. That works. Makes it explicit for somebody who goes to a pub guide website (there are many), spots this one then looks at OSM to find i

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

Am Do., 26. Sept. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen : > Tagging two main features on one object isn't good practice anyway (see >> wiki page One feature, one OSM element). >> >>> >> True. It's not good practice. But it happens. Postel's Law, aka the > Robustness Principle, ought > to apply:

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 26/09/2019 17:09, Markus wrote: Thus, those disused toilets could be tagged: disused:building=toilets No, it's still a building.  "building=toilets" means that the type of the building was "toilets".  It doesn't say anything about whether it was a usable amenity or not. and separately

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 17:10, Markus wrote: > On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 15:19 Paul Allen, wrote: > >> Using disused=yes is correct and truthful. Using disused:foo=bar is ALSO >> correct and truthful. >> Both are documented as valid ways of tagging disused objects. >> > > Actually, the wiki page for

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 16:49, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Paul Allen wrote: > > BTW, that's on national cycle route 82, so whether or not it really is > > a pub would be of interest to some mappers. > > Oh, has that closed? Two or three years ago. The Eagle nearby it closed as well, but has sin

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 17:50 Paul Allen, wrote: > What is sad is that if renderers produce results that go against mappers' > expectations, > mappers will abuse tags to get the results they want and then the open > data that you > seem to feel is the most important part of the project becomes worth

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 26/09/2019 16:48, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Paul Allen wrote: BTW, that's on national cycle route 82, so whether or not it really is a pub would be of interest to some mappers. Oh, has that closed? That's a shame. (I stayed in St Dogmaels a few years ago, thought the Castle Inn looked wonderf

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, 15:19 Paul Allen, wrote: > Using disused=yes is correct and truthful. Using disused:foo=bar is ALSO > correct and truthful. > Both are documented as valid ways of tagging disused objects. > Actually, the wiki page for Key:disused: says: "Use of disused as a simple tag is n

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 16:18, Simon Poole wrote: > OpenStreetMap is a project that produces open data. "open" implies > everybody being allowed to use the data in any way they see fit, including > rendering disused facilities in green with pink stripes. > Ah, Open Anarchic Map. Where anything co

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

Paul Allen wrote: > BTW, that's on national cycle route 82, so whether or not it really is > a pub would be of interest to some mappers. Oh, has that closed? That's a shame. (I stayed in St Dogmaels a few years ago, thought the Castle Inn looked wonderfully old-fashioned, and was planning to go b

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

OpenStreetMap is a project that produces open data. "open" implies everybody being allowed to use the data in any way they see fit, including rendering disused facilities in green with pink stripes. There is nothing "sad" about that. Am 26.09.2019 um 15:16 schrieb Paul Allen: > On Thu, 26 Sep 201

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 00:53, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: disused:*=* means it cannot presently be used for its intended purpose. > That does not mean it does not exist. > Correct. How renders chose to display that is up to them. > Also correct (sadly). But the tagging is correct and

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

Somewhat off the topic of  'was there a proposal for' .. but follow the distorted thread.. disused:*=* means it cannot presently be used for its intended purpose. That does not mean it does not exist. How renders chose to display that is up to them. But the tagging is correct and truthful. Cho

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

Am Mi., 25. Sept. 2019 um 16:24 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen : > On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 14:48, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > E.g. an abandoned:building is probably more a ruin than a building, while >> a disused building is still a building. >> > > Either way, the building is still visible and can b

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On Wed, 25 Sep 2019 at 14:48, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: E.g. an abandoned:building is probably more a ruin than a building, while a > disused building is still a building. > Either way, the building is still visible and can be used for navigation purposes. If you add disused=yes or abandoned=y

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

Am Mi., 25. Sept. 2019 um 13:08 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>: > I saw that the wiki page Key:disused: > (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:) had a status of > "approved", but I only found a proposal approving the tag disused=yes > (see > https://wiki.ope

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 25/9/19 9:06 pm, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: When were the "Lifecycle prefixes" like "disused:key=*", "abandoned:key=*" and "construction:key=*" first used or discussed? Have a look at the talk page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:disused:#Demote_tags_into_a_disused:_namespace a

[Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

I saw that the wiki page Key:disused: (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:) had a status of "approved", but I only found a proposal approving the tag disused=yes (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:disused:&oldid=103021) When were the "Lifecycle prefixes" like "d