Proposal talk:Scheduled lifecycle

Issue still exists regardless of tags

I really like concept of namespace prefixes and systematization of tags. But mapping non-existent objects is obviously against the core principles of OSM, described here: Good practice. It applies both to historical objects with no material traces left and to future objects with no sign of construction. It doesn't matter, how sure we are about particular construction project to be started - it doesn't exist. In addition, any new tags can't change situation of systematic abuse of them - some people just can't stop thinking wishfully. --BushmanK (talk) 17:59, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Rendering need?

I'm not sure proposed/scheduled need to be rendered (although it might be nice). It is handy to be able to map things ready for them to reach the next stage (be that construction or final tags), and so I have added some things to OSM for that. Scheduled is confusing, it is potentially a short time between proposals being accepted and when you start to see signs of construction. Construction could be the ground being cleared, or even a site being closed so it can be demolished (slightly against the language, I use landuse=construction for demolition sites because I expect them to be constructed on shortly after). - LastGrape/Gregory 12:30, 1 June 2016 (UTC)