27 Sep 2019, 01:37 by graemefi...@gmail.com:
>
>
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 02:52, Kevin Kenny <> kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com
> <mailto:kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com>> > wrote:
>
>>
>> I've also mapped things like 'disused:amenity=prison
>> landuse=brownfield' for a now-closed prison that the state is trying
>> to find a buyer to redevelop. The buildings are still standing (and I
>> understand are for the most part structurally sound), but what would a
>> buyer do with them?
>>
>
> Legal offices would seem the most appropriate? :-)
>
> Going back to the disused / abandoned discussion, is this a good time to ask
> about destroyed:?
>
> A tourism establishment in our area has just been destroyed by a bushfire :-(
>
> It's planned to rebuild on the same spot, so I've marked the existing
> tourism=guest_house & amenity=restaurant tags as destroyed:, together with a
> "description" note. This has removed them from the map. Is that the right way
> of doing it?
>
It seems ok to me. Updated maps will
show current situation, reduced chance
for armchair mappers to map it from
aerial images.
>
> The associated camping ground wasn't damaged in any way (beyond losing power
> & telephone lines) but is also temporarily closed for "a while" pending road
> repairs & re-connection of power etc.
>
> What's the best way of marking that?
>
Lifecycle prefixes work better fine.
disused:leisure=* etc.
Though in case of things staying in this
state for years and without traces on the groundI would delete them as gone.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
