Talk:Key:construction

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Highway under construction, but possible for pedestrians

If a highway includes a cycleway (lane or track) or an footway, it should be possible to track, if the construction closes the highway only for cars or also for pedestrians and/or bycicles. Otherwise a routing algorithm would calculate an alternative route also for pedestrians/cyclists although it wouldn't be necessary.--Iknopf 12:58, 4 August 2010 (BST)

How about access=no + foot=yes + bicycle=yes? --Rickmastfan67 11:55, 10 September 2010 (BST)

Start date?

How would I tag the date at which construction begins? For maintenance work on roads etc. there usually is an advance notice about the exact dates between which the road will be closed. It would be useful to include this information, both so that people planning routes ahead of time will be warned and that editors can enter such information in advance without having the object in question being rendered as blocked now. --Silanea 19:00, 21 April 2011 (BST)

Construction sites that aren't roads

How would you tag that? Like a buiding or park that is being built, there are trucks there and equipment and such? --Marion Barry (talk) 15:33, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

A building: building=construction. A park (analogous to highways): leisure=construction + construction=park. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 21:54, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Please don't use the key=construction + construction=value approach for anything except highways and railways. It's a special case that exists for historic reasons, but would cause problems elsewhere. It's preferable to use the Lifecycle prefix, e.g. construction:leisure=park. A tag that's useful for construction sites in general is landuse=construction. --Tordanik 14:24, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes, thanks, makes sense, since the special value "construction" would need a special handling. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 20:09, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
please check my recent page edit. compare with taginfo. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 20:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

On Relation?

This change brought onRelation=yes. What relation type might fit here? Highway, railway, building and landuse are all ways or areas and multipolygon is no relation by definition. I changed it back.--Jojo4u (talk) 09:43, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Usage of lifecycle prefix

As far as I understand the key=construction + construction=value approach only exists for historic reasons, but would cause problems if used elsewhere than for highway and railway. It's preferable to use the namespace prefix, e.g. construction:railway=tram. Furthermore this is the only way openrailwaymap renders it correctly. Shouldn't we suggest to use the namespace prefix approach? Robsteinde 13:52, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm all for that. maro21 21:44, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
"would cause problems if used elsewhere than for highway and railway" I agree. "Furthermore this is the only way openrailwaymap renders it correctly" this is irrelevant, and something that this data consumers can fix. "Shouldn't we suggest to use the namespace prefix approach" for railways and roads it should not be described as primary, mandatory or needed Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand your point of view Mateusz Konieczny. As far as I understand it's preferable to use the namespace prefix in general. For highway and railway the key=construction + construction=value approach exist in addition to that. Though namespace approach should be used everytime and consumers (like openrailwaymap) don't need to fix anything, because they're behaving right. And we should explain that and ensure the preferable namespace approach is used all the time. --Robsteinde (talk) 16:58, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

"For highway and railway the key=construction + construction=value approach exist in addition to that." here you are confused. For highway and railway key cascading tags (highway=construction + construction=) are standard, here lifecycle prefix exists in addition and is used only by few. Maybe standarization on lifecycle prefix would be a good idea, but one should not pretend that it is standard or primary for this keys Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:42, 2 May 2022 (UTC)