Re: [OSM-talk] Redundant post box
2009/1/19 Thomas Wood : > 2009/1/19 LeedsTracker : >> 2009/1/19 Ciaran Mooney : >>> Whilst trying to find post box references in my area, I found quite a >>> few post boxes that are no longer being used. They are still there, >>> and I doubt they will be removed any time soon. However they are >>> no-longer an amenity, as no post will be collected from them. >>> >>> What is the current procedure for tagging these types of post boxes? >>> The wiki page for the amenity=post_box tag doesn't provide any >>> suggestions. >> >> I guess disused=yes for starters >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused >> >> I guess they'd still render though. Perhaps a different icon would be useful. > > Ugh, this method got through voting?! I don't know, I'm just saying what I might do having looked at the wiki. In reality I probably wouldn't map it at all, personally. However, there are many pubs near me that are closed down but are useful landmarks. For now I've used amenity=pub, disused=yes, because it seemed like the least worst option. Related in my mind is access=private. There are quite a few service roads with private access, and that combination of tags (highway=service, access=private) is rendered as a hatched road. I assume routing software can make use of this too. cheers, LT ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Redundant post box
2009/1/19 LeedsTracker : > 2009/1/19 Ciaran Mooney : >> Whilst trying to find post box references in my area, I found quite a >> few post boxes that are no longer being used. They are still there, >> and I doubt they will be removed any time soon. However they are >> no-longer an amenity, as no post will be collected from them. >> >> What is the current procedure for tagging these types of post boxes? >> The wiki page for the amenity=post_box tag doesn't provide any >> suggestions. > > I guess disused=yes for starters > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused > > I guess they'd still render though. Perhaps a different icon would be useful. > > Hope this helps, > LT Ugh, this method got through voting?! -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Redundant post box
On 19 Jan 2009, at 20:33, LeedsTracker wrote: > 2009/1/19 Ciaran Mooney : >> Whilst trying to find post box references in my area, I found quite a >> few post boxes that are no longer being used. They are still there, >> and I doubt they will be removed any time soon. However they are >> no-longer an amenity, as no post will be collected from them. >> >> What is the current procedure for tagging these types of post boxes? >> The wiki page for the amenity=post_box tag doesn't provide any >> suggestions. > > I guess disused=yes for starters > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused > > I guess they'd still render though. Perhaps a different icon would > be useful. NO Using that method will mean that anything that uses amenity=post_box needs to be updated with, in some cases some really awkward logic. Use something like amenity=old_post_box or old_amenity=post_box or amenity=disused_post_box, or maybe even doing something like the construction tag: amenity=disused; disused=post_box. This is better because current users of the the data looking for something current don't have to change or look at some other tags to discover if it is still currently an amenity. Shaun ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Redundant post box
2009/1/19 Ciaran Mooney : > Whilst trying to find post box references in my area, I found quite a > few post boxes that are no longer being used. They are still there, > and I doubt they will be removed any time soon. However they are > no-longer an amenity, as no post will be collected from them. > > What is the current procedure for tagging these types of post boxes? > The wiki page for the amenity=post_box tag doesn't provide any > suggestions. I guess disused=yes for starters http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused I guess they'd still render though. Perhaps a different icon would be useful. Hope this helps, LT ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Redundant post box
Hi, Whilst trying to find post box references in my area, I found quite a few post boxes that are no longer being used. They are still there, and I doubt they will be removed any time soon. However they are no-longer an amenity, as no post will be collected from them. What is the current procedure for tagging these types of post boxes? The wiki page for the amenity=post_box tag doesn't provide any suggestions. Regards, Ciarán ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
