[Imports] [Talk-it] Fwd: Re: Sabbioneta buildings import

Giorgio Limonta giorgio.limonta80 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 19 14:44:54 UTC 2018


Hi Andrea,

There is still an historic=monument.


Sorry, done.


If I'm not mistaken, the proposal is to map an "oratorio" in the following
> way:
> amenity=community_centre
> community_centre=parish_hall
> denomination=catholic
> religion=christian


Ok I fixed


The problem is that without a tagging plan we have to scan for features in
> your OSM file to see if they are mapped correctly :-/


I tried to make it clearer, please review them.


Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?

For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
> is not the only one):
> https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/


yes but that was a problematic one: if I creat two building parts and a
building feature that contains them, josm validator marks them as an error.
(perhaps for the particular shape). I solved by erasing the lower part that
surrounded the main building.


(and it is not the only one)


I checked again, I hope it's better now


Anyway it seems the OSM file is in much better shape. Let's hope to finish
> this review soon :-)


thanks for your patience ;)

bye

2018-02-16 18:16 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane <musuruan at gmail.com>:

> Hi Giorgio,
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Giorgio Limonta <
> giorgio.limonta80 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You wrongly tagged history=memorial features as historic=monument.
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmonument
>>>
>>
> There is still an historic=monument.
>
>
>> Please look at this recent thread on the talk-it ML about correctly
>>> tagging an "oratorio" (e.g. the youth centre, not the church):
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2018-Febru
>>> ary/062020.html
>>> OK but I don't think bell towers are places of worship. Other opinions
>>> are welcome.
>>
>>
>> Done thanks
>>
>
> If I'm not mistaken, the proposal is to map an "oratorio" in the following
> way:
>
> amenity=community_centre
> community_centre=parish_hall
> denomination=catholic
> religion=christian
>
>
>> What is missing in your proposal is a good tagging plan (i.e. what tags
>>> will be places on different features). Right now I have to look for
>>> features and see if they are tagged correctly.
>>> An (old) example is the following:
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sardegna/Import/Edificato#Tagging
>>
>>
>> Yes my tagging plan it's very simple because the import information are
>> poor. But I will improve the information after the import with a "classic"
>> mapping approach ;)
>>
>
> The problem is that without a tagging plan we have to scan for features in
> your OSM file to see if they are mapped correctly :-/
>
>
>> About 3D buildings
>>> There should be only one building tag on the outline. But you have two
>>> building=* and there isn't one on the building outline.
>>> Tags relevant for the complete building should be only on the building
>>> outline (e.g. amenity=place_of_worship + religion=* + denomination=* +
>>> name=*).
>>> If you want to specify different height and roof on the various parts,
>>> you must place a building:part tag on each of them.
>>> Thus 2D renderers will ignore building:part tags but they will show the
>>> overall building.
>>
>>
>> You right, I (think) understand that and I fixed the "not residential"
>> buildings
>>
>
> Why did you avoid "not residential" buildings?
>
> For example, the following building is still not correctly mapped (and it
> is not the only one):
> https://postimg.org/image/p3b4wmsgz/
>
> It should have two building:part tags one for each different section of
> the house (now it only has one).
>
>
>> It is wrong to have two POI's - one as a building and one as a node.
>>> Anyway, I haven't understood how and when you will handle these
>>> duplicate features.
>>> BTW, what is wrong with the name "Teatro Olimpico"? You could tag the
>>> feature with name="Teatro all'Antica" ("all'Antica" and not "All'Antica")
>>> and alt_name=""Teatro Olimpico" (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki
>>> /Teatro_all'Antica).
>>
>>
>> Yes, done.
>>
>
> You current OSM file has one duplicate node. You can find it with JOSM
> validator.
>
> Anyway it seems the OSM file is in much better shape. Let's hope to finish
> this review soon :-)
>
> Bye,
>
> Andrea
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20180219/84e5ad71/attachment.html>


More information about the Imports mailing list