On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:27:40AM +1100, Warin wrote: > On 14-Mar-17 09:13 AM, ael wrote: > > > English is not my primary language, but it seems a little contradictory > > > here. > > > > > > "landuse" says that a specific piece of land is being used for something. > > > Then "disused" says that it's being used for nothing. > > > > I have had problems with this rather literal interpretation of disused. > > I have tagged certain quarries as 'disused' because stone is no longer > > being harvested. But those quarries are still quarries, are still major > > features on the landscape with 100s of metres of quarry faces, and > > massive spill heaps. People do walk there, and sometimes there is > > informal rock climbing in some of them, but they are not in proper use > > for any other purpose: they are quarries. > > > ' > > I think disused is correct ... > but it needs to be applied correctly so that not only OSM 'rules' are done, > but it gives some comprehension as to what is going on. > > disused:landuse=residential > > This gives the under standing that it is disused now, but was a past land use > of residential. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused: > > Does that help?
Not sure. I think that I discovered something like that but then the quarries were not rendered. Of course, I don't want to tag for the renderer, but in this area these features are highly significant, and it would be misleading - and dangerous if the map is used for navigation - if they are not shown. I have just refreshed my memory on what I did, and I see that in one case I used disused=quarry with landuse=quarry which is being rendered. That seems to be in the spirit of wiki/Key:disused:, at least. But you could still object to the apparent contradiction. ael _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
