[OSM-talk] Underground / hovering buildings

M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Feb 15 17:41:54 GMT 2011

2011/2/15 Jacek Konieczny <jajcus at jajcus.net>:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 12:12:34AM +0100, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> 2011/2/14 Andrew Guertin <andrew.guertin at uvm.edu>:
>> > Second, an underground building. Connects to other buildings that are at
>> > ground level and have basements.
>> layer=-1 for the underground building. You could maybe also try covered=yes
> layer=-1 tells only that the thing is under layer=0 and over layer=-2,
> nothing in relation to 'ground level'

I wasn't referring to "ground level" but to the other buildings that
are above and to the earth / ways / landuse / natural features /
landcover that are probably above.

> (some rivers or roads may have
> layer=-1 or layer=1 on most of its length).

In our data yes. In reality besides tunnels you would hardly find this
(assuming that it is easier to understand for mappers to set layer=1
for objects above then "default" layer=-1 for stuff that "might" cross
underneath other objects.

> For underground roads and waterways 'tunnel=yes' works well. Would it be
> applicable to buildings?

consider tunnel=culvert for underground waterways (depending on the situation)

> And in some cases I guess a footway or other tunnel may be a good
> representation of the underground connection of buildings.



More information about the talk mailing list