Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

[Warin]

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: out 
of OSM please.


The explanation also for disused is ok, but what about was: (~10.000) 
or abandoned: (~180.000) ? Are you telling me are these items now 
exists yet in OSM? Also this 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41779143 
 ?


I don't map anything that does not exists, the works to do the 
conservation of the sand has almost done. The parking is 
transformed.It is not a parking no more but is the same zone.It is not 
the first example you can find of that in OSM.


Also I know in background OSM database does not erase anything!! (I 
have read it marks with non-visible tags or something like that) so 
there is no reason for losing the information we have now. It is 
present, it is real, and I invite you to visit this beautiful zone ;)




OSM in principle is for things that exist.

disused in OSM indicate that the feature is there, and can be easily 
restored back into functioning condition.
abandoned in OSM means you can still see something of the feature there, 
but it cannot be easily restored.


planning in OSM is strange. I don't map it. However some insist on 
adding things in the 'planning stage' .. so this does provide for it.
Where construction has started on one end then I see the point of having 
the rest of it as 'planned'.


But something that is no longer there? .. OHM is the place for that. OHM 
is evolving and young, so there will be times where things are not so good.
I have moved some things out of OSM into OHM. And will continue to do so 
where they are no longer on the ground.
Some things are historical even where they are still on the ground, I 
copy those from OSM to OHM .. but leave them in OSM.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

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.g. a railway-track 
with trees growing between the rails). Abandoned is not only disused, but also 
in some form of decay.

cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

[yo paseopor]

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 disused is ok, but what about was: (~10.000) or
abandoned: (~180.000) ? Are you telling me are these items now exists yet
in OSM? Also this https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41779143 ?

I don't map anything that does not exists, the works to do the conservation
of the sand has almost done. The parking is transformed.It is not a parking
no more but is the same zone.It is not the first example you can find of
that in OSM.

Also I know in background OSM database does not erase anything!! (I have
read it marks with non-visible tags or something like that) so there is no
reason for losing the information we have now. It is present, it is real,
and I invite you to visit this beautiful zone ;)

Salut i mapes
yopaseopor

PD: This issue is about a parking of the zone, it is not about an imported
item.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

[Mateusz Konieczny]

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://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

[Ilya Zverev]

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 was:building (not sure about the exact prefix) to tell 
mappers not to re-add it to the map. When a mapper finds a plan for a new city 
block, a prefix "proposed:" will tell them that yes, we know about that plan, 
but it's not up yet.

Another use for lifecycle prefixes is a temporary closure. For example, when a 
shop closes and most likely another shop will open, we add "disused:shop" to 
mark the location of the POI, prompting to re-survey it.

By no means you should use these prefixes to _add_ information about something 
that's not there. OSM is only for objects that exist on the ground right now. 
With a few exceptions dictated by nature of mapping.

Ilya

> 24 июля 2018 г., в 16:30, yo paseopor  написал(а):
> 
> 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 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix why I can't use it with 
> exact information: nor "was" but the year or the exact date of the 
> information (I know it because I am from the zone of that item).
> 
> Yes, I see there is with some suffixes, specially name  . But if I do that I 
> will lose some information I have had with the other tags. Also I would might 
> use it a suffix (one user told me query it aat taginfo : about ~100 uses) . 
> And then I think: What if I do the same but with the prefix (as the lifecycle 
> prefix) . In that way the tags will be ordered by year, making easy the 
> possibility to make a map with a specific year, for example. Also I don't 
> lose any information and as the prefix (not new tags, sorry) is numeric when 
> you order the tags to edit in software like JOSM these are together without 
> bug disturbances or influences on the present of the information. Also these 
> kind of tags would be able to be ignored to standard systems as iD, for 
> example. It is better to make that in prefix than the suffix.
> 
> Salut i mapes
> yopaseopor
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Use of namespace as a Lifecycle

[yo paseopor]

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
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix why I can't use it
with exact information: nor "was" but the year or the exact date of the
information (I know it because I am from the zone of that item).

Yes, I see there is with some suffixes, specially name  . But if I do that
I will lose some information I have had with the other tags. Also I would
might use it a suffix (one user told me query it aat taginfo : about ~100
uses) . And then I think: What if I do the same but with the prefix (as the
lifecycle prefix) . In that way the tags will be ordered by year, making
easy the possibility to make a map with a specific year, for example. Also
I don't lose any information and as the prefix (not new tags, sorry) is
numeric when you order the tags to edit in software like JOSM these are
together without bug disturbances or influences on the present of the
information. Also these kind of tags would be able to be ignored to
standard systems as iD, for example. It is better to make that in prefix
than the suffix.

Salut i mapes
yopaseopor
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging