Today's Topics: > > 2. Re: Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED" (althio) > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:58:27 +0100 > From: althio <[email protected]> > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Lifecycle concepts, "REMOVED" > Message-ID: > <caf1yudbqrvozeskk3keek-qzubj6hxe085xr2tasfd1a5ou...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Mateusz Konieczny <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes, feature that does not exist anymore (or even never existed!) or > > is only proposed has no place in OSM. > > +1. No place on rendered map and apps. +/-1. No place on DB. > > > With possible caveat that features that are extremely likely to be added > > (recently destroyed building visible on aerial images etc) element with > note > > explaining situations makes sense. > > +1. Tag:note=* is useful for such cases. > > > But not a full tagging scheme! > > -1. If you keep the outline in OSM database, removed:building=* instead of > building=* is efficient, can be quicker than free-form note=*, clear and > informative. Hi,
Just a link we had the same discussion earlier this year, link http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=29723 in Dutch sorry. The outcome was tag or ad plans if there’s any kind of activity, signs (?) , but measuring, groundwork and so on is sufficient to mark an area as landuse=construction and make a start drawing the supposed trace, step by step. OSM is not an official planning’s map for anyone, don’t start drawing if there nothing out there to see. Greetz
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
