[OSM-talk-be] Nodes or areas to tag amenities
Marc Gemis
marc.gemis at gmail.com
Wed Apr 18 09:55:33 UTC 2018
The idea of using indoor mapping is good, and it's probably the future
to solve all the problems you mention. (we had a similar discussion
last Friday on the Riot channel)
Some remarks:
- does it make sense for a "room" to have an house number and a street
? I would expect those on the building, and floor or level or so on
the room.
- I'm not familiar enough with the simple indoor tagging, but I would
expect that a restaurant exists of multiple rooms (dining, toilets,
kitchen) not just one.
- On the Riot channel the entrance to the restaurant was also seen as important.
m
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Ubipo . <ubipo.skippy at gmail.com> wrote:
> Everyone,
>
> A long standing question for osm mapping in cities is wether to tag
> amenities in multi-purpose buildings as:
> - a separate node inside the building's way
> - the building itself, using both building=house and amenity=* (only valid
> with single-amenity buildings)
> The node approach has consistency issues like these buildings:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/656793551 .
>
> The area approach is more consistent but doesn't really allow multi-purpose
> buildings.
> A third, lesser used method is to use part of the simple indoor tagging
> schema. I've used a simplified version of this for this restaurant:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/580985564 .
> This approach uses two overlapping ways, one for the general building
> (tagged building=house) and one for the restaurant on the ground floor
> (tagged room=restaurant and of course amenity=restaurant).
>
> Drawbacks of this are for one that the two ways fully overlap. This triggers
> the JOSM validator and probably some QC tools. Secondly renderers might have
> trouble placing the icons and house numbers of multiple areas like this.
> Luckily both these problems could be fixed. The positives are of course:
> consistency and the possibility for multiple amenities (using the level=*
> key).
>
> What do you all think of this approach?
>
> Kind regards,
> Pieter (Ubipo)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
More information about the Talk-be
mailing list