Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

On 25/07/18 02:00, yo paseopor wrote: Thank you for guide me to a project that...doesn't work at some times. You know now why my option is the one I have made. In addition to that. As the future does not exist these items with proposed also does not exist, doesn't? So these (~20.000) items: ou

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

sent from a phone > On 24. Jul 2018, at 18:00, yo paseopor wrote: > > abandoned: (~180.000) ? Are you telling me are these items now exists yet in > OSM? yes, abandoned means there is an abandoned feature there. If you go there, you should see something (a feature in decay, most likely, e.

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

Thank you for guide me to a project that...doesn't work at some times. You know now why my option is the one I have made. In addition to that. As the future does not exist these items with proposed also does not exist, doesn't? So these (~20.000) items: out of OSM please. The explanation also for

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

24. Lipiec 2018 15:30 od yopaseo...@gmail.com : > tagging of erased items > Please, do not add (especially via import!) objects that are no longer existing. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://l

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

Lifecycle prefixes are not for adding historic or future data in OpenStreetMap. Please see http://openhistorymap.org/ for that. These prefixes are in OSM only to avoid mapping mistakes. For example, when a building is visible on a commonly used satellite imagery, but has been demolished, we use

[Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

Hi! As I have received some notes for Mueschel and other user in a authorized import of the Spanish Cadastre I want to explain some variations I use in tagging of erased items. The rationale is simple: If I can use the prefix "was:" and also exists https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Namespace and