The english wiki states that one should add building=hangar and aeroway=hangar to hangars. And then I also found some places with the tags building=* and military=hangar.
Is this really what we want? There’s probably lots of places where only the one or the other tag is present. How can we improve on that?
The tag building=hangar is certainly valid as a single tag.
It is not unusual for hangars to have found other uses long after their
associated airfield has returned to farmland.
That seems redundant to have two building tags. It should be either aeroway or building when the associated airfield is shutdown. The are plenty of was of denoting a hangar is for military use such access, landuse or even owner/operator fields.
I don’t think that anyone’s proposing that? A “building” tag describes what sort of building it is, not what it is used for. If something was built as an aircraft hangar then that is what the “building” tag should be, regardless of what it is currently used for.
“aeroway=hangar” is a description of the current use. Either tag can be valid without the other, though given the size of aircraft most “aeroway=hangar” were probably built as “building=hangar” (maybe with a few “building=farm_auxilliary” on smaller farm airstrips).
Thanks for the clarification. That actually makes sense to me.