[Tagging] adjacent buildings

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Mon Feb 8 00:57:40 GMT 2010

2010/2/8 Roy Wallace <waldo000000 at gmail.com>:
> Should buildings adjacent to each other be mapped:
> 1) individually, with shared boundaries


> 2) individually, with an arbitrarily small gap between boundaries

-1, if there is no gap in reality, no shouldn't map one.

> 3) as one contiguous area?

-1. You can do this to be faster in the beginning, but it is less
acurate, looses information, and get's less practical when you come to
the point that you add additional information to some of the

> to [1], which says: "For areas adjacent to ways, the consensus is to
> generally leave a small gap between the area and the way instead of sharing
> the boundary". What about *areas adjacent to areas*?

They should share boundaries. I personally tend to draw separate
polygons (boundary ways overlapping) but there is also other mappers
that promote shared ways (requires MP-Relation, why I think this gets
stuff more complicated in simple situations (2 common nodes)).


More information about the Tagging mailing list