I agree that building=hut is difficult to discern from remote imagery, and fairly ambiguous. The definition for building=hut in the Map Features list [1] is, "A hut is a small and crude shelter."
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features ~~Steve On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Russell Deffner <[email protected] > wrote: > Dale, hopefully you meant “building=hut” not capitalized? > > > > All, I agree with most in this thread, but there was a mention of the ‘HOT > Workflow’; which I would clarify as being: create instructions assuming > most mappers will have no local knowledge; so typically that means – > building=yes is always ‘correct’ until someone who knows for sure can > ‘upgrade’ the tag; doesn’t matter so much if point/polygon is used as a > single node with building=yes as the only tag can always be upgraded as > well (however, for some projects we are actually trying to get accurate > building footprints accurate for estimations, etc. – so that should be > specified in the instructions). Otherwise, if we are trying to map specific > things like schools, or huts, etc. then that should be specified in the > project instructions with a link to a tracing guide or further instructions > for how to identify the feature and of course the appropriate tag(s) to use. > > > > Just my 2, > > =Russ > > > > *From:* Dale Kunce [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 29, 2015 7:58 PM > *To:* Courtney Clark; Suzan Reed > *Cc:* [email protected]; chris zontine > *Subject:* Re: [HOT] Tagging hut=yes > > > > At the Red Cross we've used building =Hut looking at fire prevention in > Uganda in 2012. Generally these buildings were round and all tags were > field verified. We also use it in some field mapping activities once we > know the basic construction type. However, I agree with a lot that has been > said already. Using building=Hut is case specific and shouldn't apply to > all round buildings, no matter where they are. > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015, 9:01 PM Courtney Clark <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I agree with Suzan and Jorieke, both in general and specifically as > someone closely involved with the project around task 1034. While this > issue may still be in discussion among the HOT community, I can say that > for this project, the simple building tag is preferred instead of hut. > > > > Thank you, Chris, both for asking this question and for helping with our > task! > > > > > On Tuesday, September 29, 2015, Suzan Reed <[email protected]> wrote: > > Greetings, > > In many countries people’s houses, churches, workshops and other buildings > are round, not square. Or, a building can be a combination of round and > square. So tagging should be building=yes. Just because a building is round > does not make it a “hut”, whatever that means. It’s a home, church, or > industrial building same as if it were square. > > Two cents from me. > > Cheers! > > Suzan > > > On Sep 29, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Jorieke Vyncke <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi all, > > Just giving my two cents. > > For me mapping a building like a hut does not signify a lot. > What is exactly a hut? Is it just a round building? Round buildings > can be made out of several materials and have several different > functions. Also why would a round building get another tag if a square > building is almost the same size, made out of the same materials and > has the same function? > > What significant is for me, is that it is a house, a granary or a roof > to hide against the sun. Also the material of what it is made of is > significant: roof out of straw or metal, walls out of bricks or clay > ... In my opinion drawing a circle and tagging it with building = yes > , and potentially other tags is the best. > > For me mapping buildings as huts doesn't signify a lot, on the > contrary, I don't know what people who are living in the mapped 'huts' > will think of it that their house is mapped like a 'hut'. I suppose it > depends on how 'huts' are perceived in every culture. So yes also for > this reason I prefer mapping: building=yes. > > Like I said, just my two cents :-) > > Best greetings, > > Jorieke > > > > 2015-09-29 11:55 GMT, john whelan <[email protected]>: > > The HOT convention seems to be tag them building=yes. OSM and HOT are > > slightly different in OSM it is acceptable to tag a node rather than the > > HOT convention circle. Because HOT has a lot of very new mappers and > their > > work is validated ie often corrected I think it is important to clarify > > this. > > > > Also the training material needs to be considered, having one answer in > one > > place and having the training material say something else would be > awkward. > > > > Cheerio John > > > > On 28 September 2015 at 22:29, Dale Kunce <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Chris, > >> I would use the more widely used tag building=hut. > >> > >> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=hut#values > >> > >> Dale > >> > >> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 8:51 PM, chris zontine <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Greetings. > >>> > >>> I was involved in mapping task 1034 and a fellow mapper mentioned they > >>> used the tag hut=yes in place of building=yes. I looked up the use of > >>> key > >>> hut[1] and apparently it is used but in very limited circumstances. > >>> > >>> The mapper said it was used to map a circular structure so I presume > the > >>> usage was correct. Given the lack of general use what is the consensus > >>> on > >>> using this tag? > >>> > >>> [1] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=hut) > >>> > >>> Chris Zontine > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> HOT mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> sent from my mobile device > >> > >> Dale Kunce > >> http://normalhabit.com > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> HOT mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > > > > -- > > Innovation Fellow, Peace Corps > Returned Peace Corps Volunteer, Guinea 2012-2014 > Loyola University Chicago > 231-740-9595 | [email protected] > > > > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > >
_______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
