Perhaps setting both building=yes and disused: building=apartments would fulfill all the needs.
Regards, Mike On 18 Dec 2019, 12:00, at 12:00, talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: >Send Talk-GB mailing list submissions to > talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > talk-gb-ow...@openstreetmap.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of Talk-GB digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Disused or empty apartments prior to demolition > (David Woolley) > 2. Re: Disused or empty apartments prior to demolition > (Robert Skedgell) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 20:54:24 +0000 >From: David Woolley <for...@david-woolley.me.uk> >To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Disused or empty apartments prior to demolition >Message-ID: <14f1fd0d-149b-e3dd-40e4-a1da4c995...@david-woolley.me.uk> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > >On 17/12/2019 20:35, Warin wrote: >> >> so >> building=apartments >> becomes >> disused:building=apartments >> >> or >> building=yes >> becomes >> disused:building=yes > >I disagree. It is still a building. In fact some of the most >interesting buildings are disused ones. > > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 2 >Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 08:20:27 +0000 >From: Robert Skedgell <r...@hubris.org.uk> >To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Disused or empty apartments prior to demolition >Message-ID: <8277e623-b349-1534-08a3-9a085012e...@hubris.org.uk> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > >On 17/12/2019 20:54, David Woolley wrote: >> On 17/12/2019 20:35, Warin wrote: >>> >>> so >>> building=apartments >>> becomes >>> disused:building=apartments >>> >>> or >>> building=yes >>> becomes >>> disused:building=yes >> >> I disagree. It is still a building. In fact some of the most >> interesting buildings are disused ones. > >Rather than change the tagging on the buildings, if they are currently >enclosed by a landuse=residential polygon*, perhaps change that to >something else (splitting the polygon if appropriate)? > >Unfortunately that creates another headache, as neither >landuse=construction nor landuse=brownfield really seem to fit the >original case. > >* In the OP's example, this is >https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/676088956 > >-- >Robert Skedgell (rskedgell) > > > > >------------------------------ > >Subject: Digest Footer > >_______________________________________________ >Talk-GB mailing list >Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > >------------------------------ > >End of Talk-GB Digest, Vol 159, Issue 14 >****************************************
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
