[OSM-talk] Why we square buildings (WAS: iD invents nosquare=yes for buildings which should not be squared)

Michael Reichert osm-ml at michreichert.de
Sat May 11 19:35:23 UTC 2019


Am 11/05/2019 um 21.09 schrieb Simon Poole:
> Just a general remark on the technical issue that sparked of this
> discussion:  squaring buildings is not primarily about improving data
> quality. Non-square buildings are simply visually annoying when
> rendered, so much that I support squaring them "as a rule" too when it
> can reasonably be assumed that there are 90° angles in the actual
> building outline. But I'm not kidding myself that it improves "quality".
> If we wanted to define quality of building outlines in OSM we would
> probably be talking about deviations from the buildings footprint area,
> average deviations from the outline and so on, any of these could be
> very small even without squaring. Actually, squaring might impact them
> negatively, particularly when the outline is rough, but as said: square
> buildings are just so much easier on the eyes :-).

Are buildings with rectangular corners buildings mappers from developed
countries want to see on a map because they look more professional/tidy? ;-)

Best regards


Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20190511/3afb9793/attachment.sig>

More information about the talk mailing list