[OSM-talk] 3D somehow not compatible with our map and editing concepts / capabilities?

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Sat Jun 18 21:05:24 UTC 2016



sent from a phone

> Il giorno 18 giu 2016, alle ore 12:36, Marco Boeringa <marco at boeringa.demon.nl> ha scritto:
> 
> I have now added a type=building relation to group the Pantheon's Simple 3D features in a logical way ....... I hope you agree that navigating the buildings individual parts, and finding the actual feature that carries the buildings tags (which should always be the closed way or multipolygon with the outline role), is now fare easier.


yes, thank you, this is indeed a significant improvement and should be encouraged for all 3d mapping of buildings.

I'm undecided whether this approach should also be applied to non-building stuff like the Trajan's Column or the obelisk at St.Peter's Square. These aren't buildings (but as they are mapped as building parts, the situation isn't all that different). Either these parts should get different tags, or the same kind of logical grouping should be used?

Cheers,
Martin 


More information about the talk mailing list