[Tagging] Simplify building:part areas
Javier Sánchez Portero
javiersanp at gmail.com
Fri Aug 18 19:06:29 UTC 2017
Hello Tobias and Cristian
2017-08-18 17:41 GMT+01:00 Tobias Knerr <osm at tobias-knerr.de>:
> On 18.08.2017 10:01, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> > If e.g. the lower floors of the apartment building is wider than the
> > upper floors, you can tag the outline with both, building=apartments and
> > building:part=yes and the appropriate 3D-properties, and the narrower
> > upper floors with building:part=yes and 3D-properties, but without
> > building=*.
> It's not a good idea to use building and building:part tags on the same
> way. Doing so typically gives incorrect information to data consumers,
> because the number of levels for the building as a whole is not the same
> as the number of levels for the building part.
> In your example, the building part for the lower levels would be tagged:
> + building:part = yes
> + building:levels = <number of lower levels>
But in the other case, I end up with this:
way1: building = apartments + building:levels = 4
way2: building:part = yes + building:levels = 3
way3: building:part = yes + building:levels = 4
way1 == way2
way3 is inside way1
Josm validation will raises a warning for duplicated ways (way1 and way2).
If I use the open ways + MP relations schema mentioned by Christian, the
situation is almost the same. I will end up with three MP relations instead
of closed ways and Josm validation will raises a warning for relations with
the same members.
> And as you said, one important function of the building outline is
> backwards compatibility for non-3D-applications. Such an application
> will conclude that this building has <number of lower levels> levels,
> which is not the case.
I accept this, although is not clearly expressed in
Does everyone agree that building:levels refers to the maximum number of
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging