This post serves as a form of consensus-gathering for the unannounced deprecation of the construction_end_expected key by Maro21’s edit to the wiki page of the key.
The reason for deprecation (from Maro21’s comment in the diff) is that opening_date already exists.
Hi,
Why do you seek this discussion? The edit has been 3 years ago and nobody complained. Are there reasons against it?
If this requires dedicated discussion, then yes: exact duplicate of more popular tag that has a clear name makes sense and I support such deprecation.
Reasons against deprecation that some reasonable person could pull up:
opening_date is only for opening dates when in construction phaseBut who does? Do you support this opinion?
I don’t understand. Could you please elaborate and provide an example.
construction_end_expected | Keys | OpenStreetMap Taginfo I see no recent jump in usage. It reached 1.000 in about 2019 an is still about there.
It’s a very tiny jump. See the end of the chronology.
I don’t support the opposing opinion but the statement was to clarify
Example:
If the “SoGood Everything-Here Supermarket” is proposed to open at an abandoned location of a Walmart, a mapper might add construction_end_expected=* or proposed:opening_date=* (tag which may or may not be in use) along with all the other tags like proposed:name=SoGood Everything-Here Supermarket and proposed:shop=supermarket. Their reasoning would be that this is just a proposed opening date because they’re still planning all the other stuff for construction of SoGood Everything-Here Supermarket and the date might change before construction phase begins on this supermarket.
Thank you for the example, I think I understand what you mean. You think, opening_date cannot be set before the construction work has started.
I just read the wiki and could not find anything supporting this interpretation. It does not mention whether the construction must be going on already.
Expected date in the future when a construction will be finished and feature will be opened.
If I understand correctly, there is a building under construction (a future building=retail) and a proposal that the building will be occupied by a supermarket (a future shop=supermarket). Potentially the dates that apply to the building are different to dates that apply to the shop that will occupy it.
Perhaps mappers who wish to tag with that level of detail should be encouraged to map the building and shop as separate objects, rather than using complex tags on a single object to try to distinguish between the two features they might apply to. For example, map the proposed shop as a node within the building outline, leaving the standard construction tagging on the building object.
Note that this would be needed anyway if the building will hold more than one shop or amenity.
Understanding correctly to the example (not real)? If you meant that:
It is not a building=construction since only indoor works are present. shop=supermarket right though. It is moving into a former Walmart and there is no other POIs present inside the building.
@alan_gr