On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 3:19 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2010/9/3 Alan Mintz <alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net>: >> old_name is documented for other objects. old_operator makes sense instead >> of operator, too. > > > I don't like old_name or old_operator very much, because what do you > do with 2, 3 or more old names/operators? > > For old names it could be name:[1835-1918]=blabla but for operators it > would probably be better not to put the whole history of a company on > every single way. According to the situation we might use a relation > for the company and then attach the geometry to it (in cases that a > company was taken over / renamed and a whole network changed it's > operator).
Problem is lines are sold between companies. Perhaps the best is old_operator:1945 or some other single year that we use for all lines in a country. This is essentially what I did with old_railway_operator, but with a little more fudging (a line may not have been operating in 1945, or may have been temporarily leased to another company). _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
