[Tagging] Splitting places and hosted devices in mapping

François Lacombe fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com
Sat Jun 8 15:44:45 UTC 2019


Le sam. 8 juin 2019 à 17:08, Johnparis <okosm at johnfreed.com> a écrit :

> I agree with Marc that you should never "create nodes at a random position
> with the equipment to avoid the tag for the characteristic". If you place a
> node, it should reflect as closely as possible the actual position,
> although if the position is uncertain, it's typical in OSM to place a node
> rather than an area (closed way). If it's just a sheer guess, however, the
> node should be avoided. And if there are "a lot of these things here", then
> that argues even more strongly for making it a characteristic of the
> enclosing area, rather than a node.
>
I agree too and that's why I proposed the conversion=* tag on substations
perimeters: it avoids anyone to be tempted to add random nodes and provide
sustainable tagging to indicate that a particular process is operated even
if he doesn't know (or doesn't have time to map or whatever) the equipment
involved.


> Think of hotel rooms -- rather than mapping each room (as an area or,
> shudder, a node), you simply tag the hotel with "rooms=35".
>
That's ok because you don't need to add information about each room.
It feels the same for parking capacity (and you assume that each slot or
room are equivalent).

As to the example of a bus shelter with a bench, I personally favor making
> it a characteristic of the shelter (as Marc suggests), rather than placing
> a separate node, because the bench would not exist except for the shelter.
> If there is a bench NEAR the shelter, but outside of it, I would make that
> a separate node. But that is my personal preference, I occasionally
> encounter shelters mapped as areas with nodes for benches inside. It's not
> my style, but on the other hand I don't change it if someone else has done
> it. I do add the "bench=yes" tag, however, to the shelter itself, as that's
> useful for people searching for shelters-with-benches.
>
Agreed because often, bench and shelters are the same piece of furniture.
seat=yes would be better imho.
Moving enclosed equipment on the perimeter should be done in term of
process or function and not in term of devices (i.e don't use the same tag
on the equipment and on the enclosing feature).
Other examples could be "A pump station vs individual pumps" or "A factory
vs individual machines"...

In general, I try to think of a typical end-user case. What will make OSM
> most helpful for the person who wants to use it? (not: what will make
> things easiest for the mapper?)
>
Since the end-use could be any consumer, QA tests analysis, Render
software... we have to provide the most objective data and reduce error
prone situations

François
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190608/a70622d6/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list