[OSM-talk] Topology rules

[Warin]

On 27-Oct-17 12:00 AM, Joseph Reeves wrote:
>
>     A problem i find is with landuse=forest. Formally, those are zones
>     that are used for growing trees. But practically in OSM, that tag
>     is used for any land that is covered with trees. So formally,
>     landuse=forest shouldn't overlap with other zones, but
>     practically, until a new tag (landcover=trees) is rendered, this
>     rule isn't going to be followed.
>
>
> Getting off topic, I think you want natural=wood :
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwood

While natural=wood renders, I also tag them as landcover=trees as that 
is more truthful of what is there.
So these tree areas get two tags from me until such time as landcover is 
rendered then I will remove the natural tag.

>
> On 26 October 2017 at 13:37, Janko Mihelić <janjko at gmail.com 
> <mailto:janjko at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     I like the idea of formalizing OSM topology!
>
>     An example: power lines should share nodes with nothing except
>     power towers, portals and buildings (substation buildings).
>
>     A problem i find is with landuse=forest. Formally, those are zones
>     that are used for growing trees. But practically in OSM, that tag
>     is used for any land that is covered with trees. So formally,
>     landuse=forest shouldn't overlap with other zones, but
>     practically, until a new tag (landcover=trees) is rendered, this
>     rule isn't going to be followed.
>
>     Janko
>
>     sri, 25. lis 2017. u 18:41 Martin Koppenhoefer
>     <dieterdreist at gmail.com <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>> napisao je:
>
>
>
>         sent from a phone
>
>         > On 25. Oct 2017, at 17:36, Gaurav Thapa
>         <gthapa.work at gmail.com <mailto:gthapa.work at gmail.com>> wrote:
>         >
>         > In Nepal we have been trying to make sure that each
>         constructed building has its own footprint and is not
>         connected to a neighbouring structure via a shared wall. We do
>         this as in reality this is the case as each building structure
>         though built next to each other has its own footprint
>         (independent foundation).
>
>
>         yes, you can find both situations: a single dividing wall used
>         by both neighboring buildings (in Europe this occurs mostly
>         with medieval buildings), or each building has its own walls
>         (and foundations), but without a significant space between
>         them (e.g. 2 cm of insulating material).
>
>         I would treat both situations the same and use shared nodes,
>         but maybe wouldn’t object if someone purposefully mapped the
>         latter as 2 almost-touching buildings, although the osm
>         building ways usually describe the footprint of the completed
>         building (i.e. with facades, cladding etc.) and not the raw
>         load bearing structure.
>
>         cheers,
>         Martin
>         _______________________________________________
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20171027/656b60dc/attachment-0001.html>