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:'

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

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. > >

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

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