On Sun, 17 Sept 2023 at 20:25, Mark Wagner <mark+...@carnildo.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 17 Sep 2023 14:59:27 +0100 > Anne-Karoline Distel <annekadis...@web.de> wrote: > > > I thought that using photographic examples in the proposal would make > > it fairly clear, but apparently not. > > > > If you come to a bench that is no longer there, "vandalised:" would > > not apply. If the seats are damaged to an extend that you cannot sit > > on it any longer, then it would. There is hope that the local > > authorities or whoever puts up benches will fix it eventually, hence > > the "temporarily out of order" in the infobox. > > While hiking, I come across a guidepost that's been sheared off two > feet above the ground. Was it accidentally hit by a snowplow (thus, > "destroyed:"), or was it deliberately pulled over by a snowmobiler > (thus, "vandalized:")?
+1. I think it would be better to use destroyed:=* (or damaged=yes -- depending on the severity of the vandalism, i.e., whether the object can still be used or not) in combination with damage:type=vandalism. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
