[Talk-GB] Invalid building levels and building (part) height license compatibility
sk53.osm at gmail.com
Mon Mar 18 15:31:45 UTC 2019
How very useful; had completely forgotten about this!
However, I don't think that is Neil's issue, which is that building:levels
should have integer values (or just possibly steps of a half). Some 3D
renders make assumptions about what a default height for a single storey
(level) will be. A good example is here:
accidentally typed the house number into the building:levels tag).
On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 at 15:13, Brian Prangle <bprangle at gmail.com> wrote:
> Try this site
> origin of building height data is Environment Agency LIDAR data under OGL
> On Sat, 16 Mar 2019 at 19:20, Neil Matthews <ndmatthews at plus.net> wrote:
>> Anyone mapping in Manchester might want to take a look for strange
>> fractional building:levels.
>> It's possible that some commercial editors found that they got better
>> results with open source 3D renderers by using ~0.75 per building level,
>> rather than the documented value of 1.
>> We recently had a spate of strange edits around Aztec West -- with some
>> 1-level mobile homes being labelled as 1.5 (presumably thought they were
>> a "scaled" two storey house when satellite mapping).
>> On a similar vein, what are acceptable data sources for building:height
>> -- and how far should one ask for proof that these haven't come from a
>> source that would be problematic to OpenStreetmap?
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-GB