[Tagging] Are tunnels only below ground? (Was

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Thu Nov 5 01:12:59 GMT 2009


On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:56 PM, Randy <rwtnospam-newsgp at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Anthony wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Anthony
>><osm at inbox.org> wrote:
>>>On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:22 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
>>><dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>2009/11/4 Richard Bullock <rb357 at cantab.net>
>>>>>
>>>>>A passageway through a building (but, say, without being inside that
>>>>>building) is, to all intents and purposes, a tunnel.
>>>>
>>>>a passageway through a building that is not inside that building will be
>>>>hard to find. (how do you define: is not inside?)
>>>
>>>http://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&q=mosi+tampa&fb=1&gl=us&hq=mosi&hnear=tampa&cid=0,0,4145233176872570172&ei=kpbxSpL3BtTY8Aa95d2MCQ&ved=0CA0QnwIwAA&ll=28.054341,-82.404791&spn=0,359.981289&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=28.054341,-82.404885&panoid=utISmaJ6ph__dBBezFDBpQ&cbp=12,185.93,,0,0.05
>>>
>>
>>Currently tagged as a "tunnel", although positioned incorrectly
>>(http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.05335&lon=-82.404758&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF).
>>
>>Which is fine, as long as the definition of tunnel is changed.  The
>>definition needs to be changed, because I don't want my routing device
>>to tell me to "make a right and go through the tunnel".  And I don't
>>want dotted lines when these passages are rendered - because if I look
>>at that I'm going to expect something that goes underground, and I'm
>>going to be confused when there's no tunnel, but just a building which
>>was built over top of a road.
>
> From the picture, it appears that where the road is covered by the
> building there is actually a pedestrian way and doors into the building
> from the highway. If that's the case, then it is clearly not a tunnel, be
> it above or below ground.
>
> How would you like to see something like that rendered besides dashed. Oh,
> you said not dotted. Is dashed OK?

No.  I don't really know if this is considered dashed or dotted, but
to me, the dashed/dotted lines in this image represents a tunnel, not
a road with a building (or other road) over top of it:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/images/e/e0/Mapping-Features-Road-Tunnel.png

I'm not sure that the situation at the Tampa MOSI has to be rendered
any differently than any other road.  The road itself is just a normal
service road.  If you do want to render it differently, that's fine
too, but then choose something new - don't render it the same way as
something else (like a tunnel), because that's confusing.

For the proposal, apparently we're supposed to choose a rendering
style (personally I don't even like this - the renderers should choose
how to render, the mappers should just provide them with unambiguous
data, i.e. not tagging a tunnel and a non-tunnel with the same tag).
I proposed "use a fill pattern" to represent the cover.  But for this
situation, I'd prefer Martin's proposal: "the way is a normal way and
map the building".  The building should be partially transparent, so
that the way can be seen underneath it, of course.

Anthony




More information about the Tagging mailing list