Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

On 30/07/19 02:55, Dave F via Tagging wrote: I believe the main reason isn't (& probably shouldn't) deprecated is that it allows entities which are unused but still physically there, to be rendered. disused:*=* aren't rendered on the 'standard' render. That is a problem with that particular

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 4:20 PM Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > I would say that use is deprecated for things like shop=* and in use > for things like quarries, buildings, adits, bunkers etc I wind up using a lifecycle prefix mostly when the former use is recognizable, but there is another tag for

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

29 Jul 2019, 18:34 by joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com: > Ok, it's clear that these tags are not deprecated. > > Are they "in use" then? > I would say that use is deprecated for things like shop=* and in use for things like quarries, buildings, adits, bunkers etc > > According to

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

I believe the main reason isn't (& probably shouldn't) deprecated is that it allows entities which are unused but still physically there, to be rendered. disused:*=* aren't rendered on the 'standard' render. Davef On 29/07/2019 07:23, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I was going to fix the status of

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

Ok, it's clear that these tags are not deprecated. Are they "in use" then? According to https://taghistory.raifer.tech they've both increased in number by about 3500 features in the past 12 months. In comparison, disused:shop=* has been added about 3000 times in the same time period. On

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 13:54, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Is there a case where making it visible would actually be useful? > Yes, I would argue that disused physical objects should be rendered. A disused:building=house is still a house. An abandoned:building=house is still a house. Even

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 13:43, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 29/07/2019 13:05, Paul Allen wrote: > > > It applies to more than just quarries. The problem is that the namespaced > version, when > applied to physical objects, renders them invisible (on standard carto). > > Please let's just stop

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

To be more exact someone decided to delete content and document prefix on the same page instead of creating new one. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:disused:=878757=862845 29 Jul 2019, 08:45 by o...@westnordost.de: > Sounds to me that those pages were incorrectly

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

29 Jul 2019, 14:05 by pla16...@gmail.com: > On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 07:24, Joseph Eisenberg <> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > >> >> I see that there was just a mention added that landuse=quarry plus >> disused=yes might be more sensible than

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

On 29/07/2019 13:05, Paul Allen wrote: It applies to more than just quarries.  The problem is that the namespaced version, when applied to physical objects, renders them invisible (on standard carto). Please let's just stop worrying about just that one renderer... It's fine with usages. 

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

Yes, buildings are a good example of a feature that can be disused or even abandoned, but remain a building=house or building=barn. I've recreated the pages. Please check them and make or suggest any improvements needed: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:disused=yes

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

>> By the way, it seems the wiki does not show "statuses" correctly for >> historic page revisions: it shows a status (the current one?) where there is >> none set in the template, and it shows statuses that haven't been in >> existence when the revision was published. > > This might be

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 07:24, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > > I see that there was just a mention added that landuse=quarry plus > disused=yes might be more sensible than disused:landuse=quarry. > It applies to more than just quarries. The problem is that the namespaced version, when applied to

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

Am Mo., 29. Juli 2019 um 09:26 Uhr schrieb Frederik Ramm < frede...@remote.org>: > > Frankly, I am worried about the obsession with tag "statuses". I > couldn't care less whether "abandoned=yes" was obsolete, deprecated, in > use, or even voted on; "negating tags" like this is are dangerous and >

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

Hi, On 29.07.19 08:23, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > I was going to fix the status of abandoned=yes which is currently > incorrectly listed as "obsolete". I thought it was probably > deprecated, since the wiki page was deleted when Key:abandoned:* > (namespaced) was made in 2015, but it's still used

Re: [Tagging] Are disused=yes and abandoned=yes deprecated by disused:key=value & abandoned:key=value?

Sounds to me that those pages were incorrectly deleted. Only because someone can tag the abandonedness of a single tag of a feature, doesn't mean that the tag that applies to the whole feature is deprecated. Actually, sine best practice is to map each feature as an own element (unless maybe