On 11/8/21 7:27 pm, Michael Collinson wrote:
Simon,
Without knowing the nature of the challenge, I assume the apparent
anomaly is a road apparently bulldozing through a building.
Me, I'd either leave it as it is or to be squeaky clean (if I know
from on-the-ground) I'd map the two sticky out bits as building=roof.
I agree .. with layer=1. It is similar to a petrol station forecourt
roofs that shelter customers from the weather.
I don't know if there is any consensus on whether a simple canvas
awning counts as a "roof" or a temporary accoutrement not worthy of
mapping at all - others may comment.
If it is temporary I don't map it.
If it is 'permanent then I'd map it .. material=canvas?
This could also be an opportunity to introduce simple 3d buildings.
Here leave the building as is but within it draw 3 building part
areas: building:part=roof, building:part=roof, building:part=yes
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:part
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings
Here is what Swan Hill currently looks like:
https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=-35.3427895&lon=143.5619395&zoom=18
Err .. I'd keep it simple and have the roof as a separate way - no
building part for it.
Mike
On 2021-08-11 08:23, Simon Slater wrote:
G'day all,
From a Maproulette challenge ( https://maproulette.org/browse/
challenges/19168 ) which had a couple of things in our area marked as
VIC -
BuildingRoadIntersectionCheck , one of which is a KFC drive-through with
awnings, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-35.34316/143.56033
Is this something to leave as-is, or should a change be made to
either the way
or building or both? If a change is needed, what type?
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
