Andrew Errington wrote:
It would be more logical to have the date construction started be
> start_date, and the date construction completed be completed_date.
> Having the completion date tagged as start_date doesn't make sense.
I agree. We have this 'opportunity' in Korea to record the start and end
dates for construction of bridges, tunnels and buildings. This
information is often visible on a plaque on or near the structure:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Korea_bridges
At the moment there is are 'temporary' tags to record this:
construction_start_date=2003-05-09
construction_end_date=2004-12-09
Since there are only a few instances of it they would be easy to change.
I asked on the tagging list if there was a better way to do this but we
didn't really reach a conclusion.
I think 'start_date' on its own is insufficient, and really not the right
tag to mean 'construction has ended and people started using the
building/structure/whatever'. However, if it's defined that way then it's
fine, but we then need a way to tag the start of construction.
My take on things relates to routing and so ANY way that has a start_date or an
end_date should basically be ignored if it is outside the current time frame. So
when a new bridge opens to traffic then that should be the simple start_date.
construction_start_date then also makes sense, but so does route_approved_date
and some others relating to the development process. I'm not sure that all of
the potential dates are really necessary, but if the information IS available,
then it would be nice to be able to include it?
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
