Hello Warin,
I find unfair and surprising your last wiki change while the discussion
is still ongoing.
1) saying that historic: is one in the category "Repurpose" is amazing.
let's take for example the example found of the wiki page of the first
key you put in this category
historic=archaeological_site
historical: civilization=ancient_roman
This does not mean that this site is now being reused for something else
such as a soccer field.
imho the historical namespace: simply means that we are talking about
the historical importance of an object. this has nothing to do with the
life cycle of an object but rather describes the context in which it was
created, like we do with start_date.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/229279903
If you want to define the current usage of the castle,
the tag building:use=residential seems to me more appropriate than
claiming that historical: implies a different reuse today.
2) same problem with your classification of namespace was:
the tag does not mean that the location has been assigned to something else.
For example, if you notice that a restaurant has disappeared, you can
modify the object and put was: in front of the key.
this does not mean, however, that the place has been reassigned to
something else.
if so, the fact that it is reassigned will be given by another key, e.
g. amenity=bar
Therefore, I find that was: is simply a generic namespace that
encompasses demolished: and removed:
it just says that the previously valid object is no longer valid today,
without lingering unnecessarily if the fact that the object has been
demolished, removed or any other method depending on the object concerned.
demolished:building removed:building and was:building means exactly the
same thing to me. this key exist in the past but is out-of-date.
I think we would gain visibility by merging these 3 namespace into the
generic term was:
Regards,
Marc
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
