[Tagging] Simplify building:part areas

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Fri Aug 18 22:52:56 UTC 2017

sent from a phone

> On 18. Aug 2017, at 21:06, Javier Sánchez Portero <javiersanp at gmail.com> wrote:
> I accept this, although is not clearly expressed in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:levels
> Does everyone agree that building:levels refers to the maximum number of building levels?

As I have understood established conventions, building:levels are defined in a rather complicated and unintuitive way: they are describing all "overground" building levels *without the roof levels* and minus the building:min_level. They can't deal with split level and don't define when a level is counting as "underground" or roof, or in other words how to handle partly underground levels. As min levels are linked you will always have to look for min level tags if you are interested in building levels. In case of a bridge-like building (i.e. levels above a void) you also don't know whose building level height / number you have to take for the min level.

To get the number of levels you will have to add building:levels and roof and underground levels, and will have to subtract min_levels. As long as it's a "simple building", otherwise you will have to invent something better.


PS: Yes, it works for the vast majority of actual buildings, only the spatially interesting buildings pose problems ;-)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20170819/57a00f87/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list