[Tagging] Tagging buildings that people work in

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Sat Jun 1 13:11:49 UTC 2019

On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 at 10:09, bkil <bkil.hu+Aq at gmail.com> wrote:

You've described the difference between specifying the high level landuse
> in an area (that may be even a few blocks large) compared to the proposed
> micro-mapping on buildings. This is correct, but I would like to know the
> reason, meaning what advantage would such a resolution carry to the map
> consumer?

About the only use I can think of is navigation.  Some of us use
building=church even when it
is no longer used as a place of worship but has been converted for
residential use because it
is recognizable as a church.  As in "Take the first left past the
church."   Not that building=church
(without amenity=place_of_worship) is rendered differently from an ordinary
building, but at least
the information is there if you use the query tool.  As in "I can see a
church, is it that building on the

I'm not convinced of the utility of this proposal for navigation, though.
Too subjective, too likely to
change with time and not very usable.  You see a building but nobody is
there.  Is that the one
that is tagged as occupied or not?  Is nobody there because it's a local
holiday, or because the
business has gone bust, or because when it was surveyed people were
stripping the fittings,

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190601/ffb11c6e/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list