On Thursday 13 August 2015 15:10:14 Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 21:54:39 +1000 > Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > For example a demolished building .. may have a new building built on > > the same spot .. with the same outline. > > Leave the node data in OSM, change the tag building=yes to > > building=demolished (may not be rendered nor official OSM tagging) > > add a note as to who/why .. > > and then if rebuilt change the tag back to building=yes... with a > > source tag please. > > If the site has a different shaped building then the nodes will have > > to be changed, or the site gets used for something else .. then > > change it. But untill then leave the old data there. > > This is a bad idea. Maybe [note=this building is demolished] to protect > against mapping from outdated aerial images may be OK. > > But expecting data consumers displaying buildings to filter out > building=demolished, building=razed, building=proposed etc etc is a > really bad idea.
Or you use demolished:building=yes as I said an hour ago. This is clearer than a note IMO, allows to retain all tags of the demolished building for reference and caters for potential data consumers interested in demolished buildings. -- The field "from" of an email is about as reliable as the address written on the back of an envelope. Use OpenPGP to verify that this message is sent by me. You can find my public key in the public directories, like pool.sks-keyservers.net.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
