My personal convention for temporary closures is to add access=no. Using access tags for these temporary orders is consistent with how we map permanent tros.
If the line is altered upon reopening or the path is formally extinguished then the appropriate changes can be made as and when they occur but we can't just assume that they will be made (many developments just factor the line of the path into the design and don't seem a diversion). Wherever possible it is preferable to retain the object history by amending the way rather than deleting and adding anew. Kind regards, Adam On Tue, 31 Jul 2018, 16:32 Dan S, <danstowell+...@gmail.com> wrote: > In the past I've simply modified the ways concerned by changing > highway=footway to higway=construction & construction=footway, leaving > all the other info intact > > As mentioned in the preamble here: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:construction > > Cheers > Dan > > 2018-07-31 16:22 GMT+01:00 Ian Caldwell <ian1caldwell+...@googlemail.com>: > > > > Some footpaths, some of which are rights of way, have been closed as > part of > > building a new residential estate > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/339576698. The closure notice says > they > > will be closed until March 2019 and I suspect they will have new routes > > when/if they are reopened. > > > > How should this be tagged or should I just delete them? I do not think > they > > exist on the ground anymore. > > > > Ian Caldwell > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-GB mailing list > > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
