[Talk-GB] Invalid building levels and building (part) height license compatibility
ndmatthews at plus.net
Mon Mar 18 21:05:37 UTC 2019
Thanks for the DEFRA link - has some potential :-)
The first issue I was raising was that for convenience some (commercial)
OSM mappers were using a value like 0.75 per building level (or
something similar) so that their rendering software could deal directly
with OSM data without post-processing it. Effectively a 100 level set of
flats would be marked as building:level=75.
The second issue is how to ensure that height values used for 3D mapping
aren't just being made up (given previous behaviour) - or coming a
source that isn't appropriate for OpenStreetmap.
Unfortunately, I haven't managed to get the editors to cite the data
source they are using for building (part) heights, etc. -- but I do note
that the area isn't mapped by DEFRA lidar!
P.S. Any suggestions on how I can measure buildings "on-foot" greatly
On 18/03/2019 15:31, SK53 wrote:
> 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: https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=52.9755467&lon=-1.2013530&zoom=18 (I
> accidentally typed the house number into the building:levels tag).
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 at 15:13, Brian Prangle <bprangle at gmail.com
> <mailto:bprangle at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Try this site
> origin of building height data is Environment Agency LIDAR data
> under OGL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-GB