<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/22/2018 7:57 PM, Paul Allen wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPy1dOKL_k9hVR4G_So9_aa9m1M1VB8qOiORA4ViFhAup-pH-Q@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">You've (perhaps inadvertently) highlighted the
problem. A detached building looks like a house, so is tagged
as<br>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>building=detached. A property in a terrace (row house
in Merkin) doesn't look like a house, so is tagged as<br>
</div>
<div>building=house.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
That's about the size of it. People will most likely continue
tagging freestanding houses as "house" because, hey, it's a house.
Luckily, it's not incorrect. I can imagine a theoretical mapper
wanting to retag them as "detached" instead, and I'd tell that
mapper: "Nah. Let those houses be. They're fine."<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPy1dOKL_k9hVR4G_So9_aa9m1M1VB8qOiORA4ViFhAup-pH-Q@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>Oh, and then there are bungalows and cottages, which
count as houses in OSM, so are tagged as<br>
</div>
<div>building=detached.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Nb, the wiki does offer building=bungalow, and there are nearly 50k
of them out there. I'd consider bungalow a special subset of
detached (which is a special subset of house, etc.)<br>
<br>
J<br>
</body>
</html>