Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag

+1 Having a landuse for “religion” seems simple to understand, simple to implement, and simple to parse when thinking of the facility as a single thing with many amenities - like a mall, office complex, or another large establishment that handles lots of visitors visitors and offers them amenities.

Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag

On 14/02/2015 1:51 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-01-03 16:28 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić >: Landuse=religious AFAIK started being used for land that is owned by a religious entity, and in it there would be schools, playgrounds, priest living grounds, and

Re: [Tagging] Change of rendering: place of worship and, terminal without building tag

> On Feb 13, 2015, at 11:51 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > 2015-01-03 16:28 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić >: > Landuse=religious AFAIK started being used for land that is owned by a > religious entity, and in it there would be schools, playgrounds, priest > livi

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

On 14.02.2015 22:11, SomeoneElse wrote: > ... it also says that it shouldn't be used on relations, which would > exclude perfectly valid multipolygons, such as this one: Multipolygons are a means to map areas. So they are covered by the area icon. The relation icon stands for relations that are n

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

On 15/02/2015 8:11 AM, SomeoneElse wrote: It appears that again people are trying to use the wiki to "tell other people how to map" rather than "describe how things tend to be mapped". A tenancy to instruct rather than guide? The wiki should be a usefull guide as to best practice rather tha

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

On 14/02/2015 07:45, Lukas Sommer wrote: Hello. The english wiki page key:building says that this key may not be used on nodes. ... it also says that it shouldn't be used on relations, which would exclude perfectly valid multipolygons, such as this one: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

On Sat, 14 Feb 2015, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > I see nothing wrong with building=* on a node, used 772612 times. > > Typical cases are: > > - somebody collects house numbers along a road, but has no access >to the geometry. Thus she can use plain addr: tags on unbuilt >properties, and add bui

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 4:16 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote: > Personally, I don't think building nodes are really useful. They are > little more than a formalized note, as most applications using buildings > will want areas. It terms of locating the building, and understanding it's function, nodes giv

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

I must chime in on this discussion. I disagree with Tobias' view. Some of us are mapping in areas with very low resolution imagery. Yet, if a house is visible, especially in remote regions, I want to be able to map it even if it's not clear enough or large enough to have a shape drawn. I have mappe

Re: [Tagging] Waste_collection - a new Feature Proposal - RFC

Am 14.02.2015 um 02:41 schrieb Dave Swarthout: > I think amenity=waste_disposal with sub tags for the type of waste being > disposed of could be a workable solution. It's more complicated than using > another top level tag like dump_station, etc., for sewage but allows for > more specificity when d

Re: [Tagging] route=running

Am 13.02.2015 um 11:19 schrieb Andreas Labres: > On 05.02.15 06:44, Andreas Labres wrote: >> Would it be O.K. to add route=running to the Wiki? > > I'd also need a value for nordic walking routes, could this be > route=nordic_walking? What is the difference between a nordic_walking and a running

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

On 14.02.2015 12:23, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > I see nothing wrong with building=* on a node, used 772612 times. Which is still only 0.006 of all buildings. Personally, I don't think building nodes are really useful. They are little more than a formalized note, as most applications using buildings wil

Re: [Tagging] building=yes on nodes?

I see nothing wrong with building=* on a node, used 772612 times. Typical cases are: - somebody collects house numbers along a road, but has no access to the geometry. Thus she can use plain addr: tags on unbuilt properties, and add building=* where a building is visible. - aerial imagery o