date:20200707

This is a very interesting example; thanks for sharing it! It definitely 
helps me see where you're coming from, and how this practice came into 
common use.


Although it is a very ambiguous situation, I would still side on this being 
a single building that just so happens to have grown slowly over time. 
Although I would not disagree that they are separate buildings either.


However, your example seems like a case that is particularly ambiguous. I'm 
not sure if it's totally comparable to the case I mentioned, which seems 
more clear cut to me. It's a single building purpose built to contain 8 
homes, all by the same builder, all in the same style. Additionally, these 
homes are part of a homeowner's association, which means there are 
restrictions even on what the owners can do to the exterior without 
approval from the association, and large structural changes to the 
buildings are not likely in the foreseeable future.


What I'm thinking is that it might be useful to have a concise discussion 
of this ambiguity in the wiki page. Since it seems to be up to 
interpretation, though, it seems providing different ways of representing 
the varying levels of ambiguity in the real world would be useful.


--
Skyler

--
Skyler
On July 7, 2020 18:06:26 Paul Allen  wrote:

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 22:41, Skyler Hawthorne  wrote:

My own personal interpretation would be to say that if two houses share
a wall, they are part of the same building. Buildings are expanded all
the time. If a shopping mall expands a wing to give more space for more
shops, we do not say the new section is a separate building; we say the
building has gotten larger.

Copyright prevents us using Google Streetview for mapping, but we
can use it for illustrative purposes.  https://goo.gl/maps/o6ribodaAqUhvak2A
That group of five dwellings was originally called Priory Terrace (the name
is not part of the address and few people know it used to be called that).
They were built at the same time by the same builder and are listed
by a heritage organization as being of significant value.

Talk a walk to the north-east (left in the image) and you will see a long line
of conjoined buildings of different styles.  Most (all?) of those other 
buildings

were built after the first 5, yet it would be perverse to describe
them as extending or enlarging those original 5 dwellings.  They're
houses that happen to share side walls (because it's cheaper and
lets them take up less room).

I said this earlier in the thread, but I think it is still applicable:
when we're tagging shopping centers, where there is a large building
containing several shops, we tag the large structure as
building=retail, and the shops as amenity=*; we do not map them as
building=shop or something like that, because they are not separate
buildings. Why do this for houses/dwellings?

Because if you followed that Streetview walk, you'd have countered 33
dwellings in that terrace.  It's nice to be able to give them addresses.
Because they're of different sizes, it's nice to show where the boundaries
between them are.  This is the start of that walk:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.08572=-4.65826#map=19/52.08572/-4.65826

Your personal justificatons for your mapping choices are perfectly
fine, but that's not what I'm proposing changing. Since it is not well-
defined what to do when a terrace has a name, that is why I am
proposing the tagging scheme with a different usage of building=terrace
than what you and the wiki say,
My opinion counts for no more than anybody else's, so you are free to
disregard it.  Redefining established use of a tag is problematic.  To say
the least.

--
Paul

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

2020-07-07 Thread Jarek Piórkowski

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 15:47, Matthew Woehlke  wrote:
> On 07/07/2020 15.24, Skyler Hawthorne wrote:
> > Sure thing, it's here:
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/42.69323/-73.69023
> > ...
> > I did not take photos, as I am not comfortable taking pictures of
> > peoples' homes,
> Google doesn't share your scruples:
> https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6927405,-73.6883336,3a,24y,315.41h,90.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGkedvwtT8168p_D1SYKF6Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

The thing that gives me most pause about this photo is that the units
seem to share a somewhat complex roof structure. It's difficult to
imagine a third-floor addition to one of the units, for example - much
of the roof structure would have to be rebuilt. By contrast, in a
semi-detached house you can usually add an extra floor on only one
side, because even if the roof structure is shared, at least it's
symmetrical between units. To me, that suggests these particular units
aren't fully independent buildings, and speaks in favour of the
tagging with building=terrace for the big outline and
building:part=house for individual parts if you want (but I think
address tagging with addr:* tags on entrance nodes would be just as
valid).

(IMHO)

--Jarek

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

2020-07-07 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick

On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 at 07:45, Paul Allen  wrote:

>
> Building for the house, node for the workplace.  Micromappers will be upset
> unless you place the workplace node precisely, of course, but you probably
> have never been inside so don't know.  That's assuming it still is being
> used as a combined dwelling and workplace
>

& then you have the residential houses where the owner works from home, &
advertises his trade / profession via a sign outside.

I've mapped them as residential=house including the address, then with a
separate node of office=accountant, craft=plumber or whatever, with their
advertised contact number included.

Any other / better way of doing it?

Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names



sent from a phone

> On 7. Jul 2020, at 23:51, Matthew Woehlke  wrote:
> 
> It looks like what we have here are "townhouses", which are somewhere in 
> between "strict" row houses and condominiums


just that there is no „town“ ;-)


> 
> I'm still inclined to argue that whether or not the *lots* are separate is 
> probably a sensible criteria. I suspect that in your "shared apartment 
> ownership" example, the case is that the multiple owners each own a 'share' 
> of a *single* property.


it is possible (and more likely), but you could also undergo procedures to 
actually split the property (maybe not in every case, or by 12.4%, I admit I am 
unsure, but suppose the split parts eventually must be independently usable, 
which is often but not always possible)


Cheers Martin 


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

sent from a phone

> On 7. Jul 2020, at 23:51, Matthew Woehlke  wrote:
> 
> Sure, but a condominium is *not* the same. A condominium is, indeed, 
> basically an apartment that you "own" rather than leasing. You don't own a 
> lot, or have any ownership whatsoever of the building exterior, and there's a 
> much higher change of having shared interior spaces.

these are technical details that might vary, don’t know about your jurisdiction 
and real estate market, but around here you do indeed own a fraction of the 
building exterior and gardens, typically the sum of all apartment surface areas 
is considered a 100%, and your share of roof terrace, storage, internal access 
space and garden is the fraction of your apartment divided by the total of 
apartment areas. It’s also a liability (maintenance cost etc.). You also own 
this fraction of the lot/ground.

Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

sent from a phone

>> On 7. Jul 2020, at 23:41, Skyler Hawthorne  wrote:
> My own personal interpretation would be to say that if two houses share
> a wall, they are part of the same building.

I agree here with what Paul wrote some posts ago: things are blurred in 
reality. The details depend on various parameters, for example building 
standards/laws. You may often find different medieval buildings that share the 
same wall but are „clearly“ different buildings, and modern row houses will 
typically have a double wall between them, separated by 2cm of insulation, 
where each wall part is independent from the other, at least in Germany they 
are built like this (reasons are mainly better noise insulation and structural 
independence).

> Buildings are expanded all
> the time. If a shopping mall expands a wing to give more space for more
> shops, we do not say the new section is a separate building; we say the
> building has gotten larger.

hm, I’m not sure. You could definitely count a lot of extensions as separate 
buildings. The mall has gotten larger, but it may be because another building 
was attached.

> 
> I said this earlier in the thread, but I think it is still applicable:
> when we're tagging shopping centers, where there is a large building
> containing several shops, we tag the large structure as
> building=retail, and the shops as amenity=*; we do not map them as
> building=shop or something like that, because they are not separate
> buildings. Why do this for houses/dwellings?

because the situation may be significantly different. 
Of course there exists both, apartments/shops in a single building, and several 
individual buildings that are attached to each other, in shopping malls as in 
housing / residential buildings.

Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 at 00:08, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

traditionally, people worked and slept in the same space (the helpers),
> today these are typically shops and above dwelling/s. Are they „houses“,
> building=house?
>

Ah, so that's what you're getting at.  A lot of those in my town.  Built as
houses.
Used initially, for a time, as houses (not necessarily with a workplace,
often
just a dwelling).  Later converted to have a shop on the ground floor with
the
upper floor used as a dwelling.

This is the big can of worms where this list splits into two warring
factions:
one insisting that only building=yes has any meaning and the other wanting
building=all_sorts_of_specialized_types.  The battles usually come to an
end when the building=yes crowd realize that we have no other way of
dealing with houses than building=house and the building=specialized_type
crowd decide they'll keep doing what they're doing but not waste time
arguing about it.  There are also side-arguments about building:for and
that's how we should deal with houses.

If it was obviously built as a house I'd tag it as building=house because
anything but building=no will render identically in many cartos anyway.
I'd omit the flat above, which is "not tagging for the renderer" and it's
only "tagging for the renderer" that is frowned upon.  Rationale: the
shop is more visible than the door to the flat; people would give
directions to the flat by saying it was above the shop but nobody
would give directions to the shop by saying it was below the flat.

> Shall we fix the single dwelling paragraph in building=house, or does it
> make sense in English?
>

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dhouse

Only if you think you're capable of forcing all those worms back into
the can.

-- 
Paul

Cheers Martin

___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 at 00:02, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

On 7. Jul 2020, at 23:45, Paul Allen  wrote:

here the buildings on the left and right:
> https://www.10cose.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/chiesa-calcata.jpg
>

I can't figure out which buildings you mean.

any but the church. It’s in the same village as the first picture, but in
> the main street, while the other is in a lateral street/alley.
>

Your description implies there are two buildings involved, one on the left,
one
on the right, and that they share common properties.  I don't see that.

Left of picture, closest to the church, could be a pair of semis or
could be a single house.  Left of the picture, furthest from the church,
not enough is visible to determine what it is.  Right of the picture,
furthest from the church, not enough is visible to determine what it is.
Right of the picture, closest to the church, could be a single house or one
of a pair of semis or part of a long terrace, or...

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

sent from a phone

>> On 7. Jul 2020, at 23:45, Paul Allen  wrote:
> Building for the house, node for the workplace.  Micromappers will be upset
> unless you place the workplace node precisely, of course, but you probably
> have never been inside so don't know.  That's assuming it still is being
> used as a combined dwelling and workplace, otherwise map it as whatever
> it is now - we don't map history (except when we do).

traditionally, people worked and slept in the same space (the helpers), today 
these are typically shops and above dwelling/s. Are they „houses“, 
building=house? Shall we fix the single dwelling paragraph in building=house, 
or does it make sense in English?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dhouse

Cheers Martin 

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names



sent from a phone

> On 7. Jul 2020, at 23:45, Paul Allen  wrote:
> 
>> here the buildings on the left and right:
>> https://www.10cose.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/chiesa-calcata.jpg
> 
> I can't figure out which buildings you mean.


any but the church. It’s in the same village as the first picture, but in the 
main street, while the other is in a lateral street/alley.

Cheers Martin ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 22:41, Skyler Hawthorne  wrote:

>
> My own personal interpretation would be to say that if two houses share
> a wall, they are part of the same building. Buildings are expanded all
> the time. If a shopping mall expands a wing to give more space for more
> shops, we do not say the new section is a separate building; we say the
> building has gotten larger.
>

Copyright prevents us using Google Streetview for mapping, but we
can use it for illustrative purposes.  https://goo.gl/maps/o6ribodaAqUhvak2A
That group of five dwellings was originally called Priory Terrace (the name
is not part of the address and few people know it used to be called that).
They were built at the same time by the same builder and are listed
by a heritage organization as being of significant value.

Talk a walk to the north-east (left in the image) and you will see a long
line
of conjoined buildings of different styles.  Most (all?) of those other
buildings
were built after the first 5, yet it would be perverse to describe
them as extending or enlarging those original 5 dwellings.  They're
houses that happen to share side walls (because it's cheaper and
lets them take up less room).

I said this earlier in the thread, but I think it is still applicable:
> when we're tagging shopping centers, where there is a large building
> containing several shops, we tag the large structure as
> building=retail, and the shops as amenity=*; we do not map them as
> building=shop or something like that, because they are not separate
> buildings. Why do this for houses/dwellings?
>

Because if you followed that Streetview walk, you'd have countered 33
dwellings in that terrace.  It's nice to be able to give them addresses.
Because they're of different sizes, it's nice to show where the boundaries
between them are.  This is the start of that walk:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.08572=-4.65826#map=19/52.08572/-4.65826

Your personal justificatons for your mapping choices are perfectly
> fine, but that's not what I'm proposing changing. Since it is not well-
> defined what to do when a terrace has a name, that is why I am
> proposing the tagging scheme with a different usage of building=terrace
> than what you and the wiki say,

My opinion counts for no more than anybody else's, so you are free to
disregard it.  Redefining established use of a tag is problematic.  To say
the least.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

2020-07-07 Thread Matthew Woehlke


On 07/07/2020 17.28, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

On 7. Jul 2020, at 21:48, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
Personally, if it's possible to determine the boundaries between
properties, my inclination would be to model them as separate
buildings. (It's somewhat worth noting that townhouses are *owned*,
at least in part, separately.) Property records can probably help
with this.


While I agree that looking at the entrance situation is useful, the
property division is not. You can have as many proprietors for any
single apartment as you wish (12.47% ownership is technically not a
problem), even more for whole buildings. Think about condominium
buildings. Some time ago we agreed to map the latter as apartment
buildings.


Sure, but a condominium is *not* the same. A condominium is, indeed, 
basically an apartment that you "own" rather than leasing. You don't own 
a lot, or have any ownership whatsoever of the building exterior, and 
there's a much higher change of having shared interior spaces.


In the case of a row house, you potentially do *completely* own 
everything between the common walls. As elsewhere noted, you may be able 
to completely tear down your unit. At the extreme end, you have 
buildings that really *are* completely separate, but so close together 
that you can barely tell.


It looks like what we have here are "townhouses", which are somewhere in 
between "strict" row houses and condominiums.


I'm still inclined to argue that whether or not the *lots* are separate 
is probably a sensible criteria. I suspect that in your "shared 
apartment ownership" example, the case is that the multiple owners each 
own a 'share' of a *single* property.


--
Matthew

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 22:15, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

Some examples for houses that IMHO are neither terraces, nor single
> dwelling buildings, nor apartment buildings:
> https://img2.juzaphoto.com/001/shared_files/uploads/1242740_l.jpg
>

That's building=escher

here the buildings on the left and right:
> https://www.10cose.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/chiesa-calcata.jpg
>

I can't figure out which buildings you mean.

>
> maybe an apartment building? Is it a terrace (I would expect no)?
>
> https://www.lettingaproperty.com/sites/default/files/property/28786/15444645841_07b7817568_k.jpg
>

It's a semi-detached house (in Estate Agent speak).  By one interpretation,
it should be building=semi.  The house adjoining might be another
buiilding=semi or, if it's the central one in a group of three, it would
have to be building=house.  As I see it, building=semi is
of no value as it's obvious whether a house is detached,
semi-detached, or in a terrace.  Also, how many houses
do you need before it's a terrace?  2? 3?  4?

2 equally sized dwellings:
>
> https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dingbat_MaryJane.jpg#mw-jump-to-license
>

They're flats.  Do we have a good way of mapping those?  I have a couple
I've
avoided mapping.  Entrance to the top one is on the main road, entrance to
the
bottom one is on a service road parallel to (but lower than) the main
road.  They
made my head hurt.

>
> Generally we also do not adequately represent basic medieval buildings
> which traditionally combined dwelling and workplace under the same roof.
> Any ideas for these?
>

Building for the house, node for the workplace.  Micromappers will be upset
unless you place the workplace node precisely, of course, but you probably
have never been inside so don't know.  That's assuming it still is being
used as a combined dwelling and workplace, otherwise map it as whatever
it is now - we don't map history (except when we do).

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 22:14 +0100, Paul Allen wrote:
> Consider a house.  In your understanding it is both a building and a
> house,
> and we tag it building=house.  Now consider another house is built
> adjacent and conjoining, so that they share a side wall.  Two houses
> in your understanding.  If they were both built at the same time by
> the same builder, we could say they were one building.  But
> these were built at different times, in different styles by different
> builders - one building or two?  What if they were built at
> different times by different builders but in the same style so
> they harmonize (without historical data you might think
> they were built at the same time).

My own personal interpretation would be to say that if two houses share
a wall, they are part of the same building. Buildings are expanded all
the time. If a shopping mall expands a wing to give more space for more
shops, we do not say the new section is a separate building; we say the
building has gotten larger.

I said this earlier in the thread, but I think it is still applicable:
when we're tagging shopping centers, where there is a large building
containing several shops, we tag the large structure as
building=retail, and the shops as amenity=*; we do not map them as
building=shop or something like that, because they are not separate
buildings. Why do this for houses/dwellings?

> 
> If there are three houses they are a terrace (maybe) but if there
> are only two houses then they are both semi-detached buildings
> (except few bother with that tag).  We've tried various ways of
> dealing
> with these things.  Reality is messy.  Our tagging is messy.  Sadly,
> these
> are two different messes.
> 
> i see only three cases where I'd use building=terrace
> 
> 1) I want to map a row of houses from aerial imagery where I don't
> know the addresses and can't precisely determine the boundaries so
> don't even know how many dwellings there are.  I tend to avoid
> mapping this type of situation.
> 
> 2) The terrace itself has a name that is a required part of the
> address.
> This is a horrible situation, not well-handled by any solution. 
> Especially
> when some of those houses may have their own names.
> 

Your personal justificatons for your mapping choices are perfectly
fine, but that's not what I'm proposing changing. Since it is not well-
defined what to do when a terrace has a name, that is why I am
proposing the tagging scheme with a different usage of building=terrace
than what you and the wiki say, that is, only when you don't know the
borders of the individual dwellings. We can choose to expand its usage,
and I don't see why not to. It does not introduce any new tags, or
propose changing any existing map data, and it fills a gap for certain
use cases.

> 3) The terrace has a name which is no longer part of the address.
> It is at one end of what is a very long terrace of houses built at
> various times and which share side walls.  The fact that five
> houses were once referred to as Priory Terrace in times long
> pass didn't merit wrapping them in a building=terrace.

I think it's well-understood that OSM should prefer the present reality
on the ground. Historical names and other data aren't under discsussion
right now.

-- 
Skyler

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

2020-07-07 Thread Alan Mackie

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 21:50, Skyler Hawthorne  wrote:

> On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 21:00 +0100, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 20:32, Skyler Hawthorne 
> > wrote:
> > > Maybe it wasn't clear, but what I'm suggesting isn't to remove the
> > > suggestion of tagging as individual building=houses, but adding
> > > another
> > > section that says something to the effect of "for cases where the
> > > terraced houses are part of a large building, and not simply
> > > attached
> > > houses, another approach could be this way..."
> >
> > That depends what you mean by "large building."  The original
> > British terminology, and the current American terminology, is
> > "row house."  Houses with common side walls built in a row.
> >
> > If you are suggesting using terrace to describe a topology that
> > isn't actually a row of houses, that would be very confusing.
> >
> > --
> > Paul
>
> On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 15:47 -0400, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> >
> > This seems like a really grey area. See also notes below.
> >
> > A good question might be, do they have separate *entrances*? If not
> > (e.g. some condominiums), then they should possibly be tagged as
> > apartments. In this case, it appears the entrances are separate.
> >
> > Personally, if it's possible to determine the boundaries between
> > properties, my inclination would be to model them as separate
> > buildings.
> > (It's somewhat worth noting that townhouses are *owned*, at least in
> > part, separately.) Property records can probably help with this. You
> > can
> > probably get shapefiles of the property boundaries from the county.
> > (Conversely, if they *aren't* separate lots, that would be an
> > argument
> > for modeling them as single buildings.)
> >
>
> They each have separate entrances, and house numbers. Public tax lot
> records confirm that they are indeed separate lots.
>
> But I'm starting to think that maybe this issue is coming down to
> semantics. What exactly do we mean when we say "building" vs "house"?
> The personal interpretation I am working off of is that a "building" is
> the complete physical structure, whereas a "house" in the context of
> the existing OSM tags (although maybe not in the general sense of the
> word) is the dwelling in which someone lives.
>
> So with this interpretation, a terrace is one building that contains
> multiple houses (or dwellings, or whatever). To me, it doesn't make
> sense to say that each house is a separate building.
>
> Admittedly, I just map as a hobby, and I am not anything like a subject
> matter expert, so I do not claim that these interpretations are the
> "correct" ones. But I would be interested to hear if anyone else has
> more knowledge or a different interpretation.
>
> --
> Skyler
>
>
> To my mind in terraced houses the party walls between are essentially
exterior walls that happen to be shared and are probably all structural,
whereas in apartment buildings or condos they are less substantial. In some
areas there seems to be a tendency for these walls to poke above the
roofline, presumably as a firebreak. I think they also tend not to have any
sort of association that looks after the building as a whole for terraced
houses, they are essentially completely separate properties that are joined
together (not that this is surveyable).

There are instances where I have seen parts of a row of terraced houses
pulled down leaving one of the old dividing walls as the new end wall
without there being much in the way of visible new structure to make it
sound again. There may just be some patched holes where beams were removed
etc. On the other hand I would not expect to see the demolition of half of
a "building" without some significant rework.

-Alan
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

sent from a phone

> On 7. Jul 2020, at 21:48, Matthew Woehlke  wrote:
> 
> Personally, if it's possible to determine the boundaries between properties, 
> my inclination would be to model them as separate buildings. (It's somewhat 
> worth noting that townhouses are *owned*, at least in part, separately.) 
> Property records can probably help with this.

While I agree that looking at the entrance situation is useful, the property 
division is not. You can have as many proprietors for any single apartment as 
you wish (12.47% ownership is technically not a problem), even more for whole 
buildings. Think about condominium buildings. Some time ago we agreed to map 
the latter as apartment buildings. 

Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 21:48, Skyler Hawthorne  wrote:

>
> But I'm starting to think that maybe this issue is coming down to
> semantics. What exactly do we mean when we say "building" vs "house"?
> The personal interpretation I am working off of is that a "building" is
> the complete physical structure, whereas a "house" in the context of
> the existing OSM tags (although maybe not in the general sense of the
> word) is the dwelling in which someone lives.
>

It isn't well defined. Partly because tags weren't well designed back
in the beginning and we've bodged things to fit.  Partly because reality
isn't well defined.

Consider a house.  In your understanding it is both a building and a house,
and we tag it building=house.  Now consider another house is built
adjacent and conjoining, so that they share a side wall.  Two houses
in your understanding.  If they were both built at the same time by
the same builder, we could say they were one building.  But
these were built at different times, in different styles by different
builders - one building or two?  What if they were built at
different times by different builders but in the same style so
they harmonize (without historical data you might think
they were built at the same time).

If there are three houses they are a terrace (maybe) but if there
are only two houses then they are both semi-detached buildings
(except few bother with that tag).  We've tried various ways of dealing
with these things.  Reality is messy.  Our tagging is messy.  Sadly, these
are two different messes.

i see only three cases where I'd use building=terrace

1) I want to map a row of houses from aerial imagery where I don't
know the addresses and can't precisely determine the boundaries so
don't even know how many dwellings there are.  I tend to avoid
mapping this type of situation.

2) The terrace itself has a name that is a required part of the address.
This is a horrible situation, not well-handled by any solution.  Especially
when some of those houses may have their own names.

3) The terrace has a name which is no longer part of the address.
It is at one end of what is a very long terrace of houses built at
various times and which share side walls.  The fact that five
houses were once referred to as Priory Terrace in times long
pass didn't merit wrapping them in a building=terrace.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

sent from a phone

>> On 7. Jul 2020, at 22:02, Paul Allen  wrote:
> If you are suggesting using terrace to describe a topology that
> isn't actually a row of houses, that would be very confusing.

the German term is equally row house (Reihenhaus). Main difference to an 
apartment building is that the individual dwellings have independent entrances, 
usually individual and separated gardens and are occupying the whole height to 
the roof. A different typology are apartment buildings with individual 
entrances from the outside where th apartments do not occupy the full height (I 
don’t know the English term, in wikipedia I found an Italian term for it: 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casa_di_ringhiera ) which refers to a specific 
typology though (there are also different types with maisonette apartments, 
i.e. it is not only a type for public housing)
I also believe we should have a dedicated type for small houses with several 
apartments (maybe 2-4), as they are quite different from big apartments 
complexes with tens or hundreds of dwellings. I tend to call them “house” , 
although our wiki states that building =house is for a single dwelling 
building, i.e. by the literal definition it would not even cover detached 
buildings with a granny annexe (secondary apartment, usually much smaller than 
the main dwelling, usually independent entrance). Some detached buildings also 
have 2 of those secondary apartments.
How do you deal with these cases?

Some examples for houses that IMHO are neither terraces, nor single dwelling 
buildings, nor apartment buildings: 
https://img2.juzaphoto.com/001/shared_files/uploads/1242740_l.jpg
here the buildings on the left and right:
https://www.10cose.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/chiesa-calcata.jpg

maybe an apartment building? Is it a terrace (I would expect no)?
https://www.lettingaproperty.com/sites/default/files/property/28786/15444645841_07b7817568_k.jpg

2 equally sized dwellings:
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dingbat_MaryJane.jpg#mw-jump-to-license

Generally we also do not adequately represent basic medieval buildings which 
traditionally combined dwelling and workplace under the same roof. Any ideas 
for these?

Cheers Martin ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 21:00 +0100, Paul Allen wrote:

> On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 20:32, Skyler Hawthorne 
> wrote:
> > Maybe it wasn't clear, but what I'm suggesting isn't to remove the
> > suggestion of tagging as individual building=houses, but adding
> > another
> > section that says something to the effect of "for cases where the
> > terraced houses are part of a large building, and not simply
> > attached
> > houses, another approach could be this way..."
> 
> That depends what you mean by "large building."  The original
> British terminology, and the current American terminology, is
> "row house."  Houses with common side walls built in a row.
> 
> If you are suggesting using terrace to describe a topology that
> isn't actually a row of houses, that would be very confusing.
> 
> -- 
> Paul

On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 15:47 -0400, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> 
> This seems like a really grey area. See also notes below.
> 
> A good question might be, do they have separate *entrances*? If not 
> (e.g. some condominiums), then they should possibly be tagged as 
> apartments. In this case, it appears the entrances are separate.
> 
> Personally, if it's possible to determine the boundaries between 
> properties, my inclination would be to model them as separate
> buildings. 
> (It's somewhat worth noting that townhouses are *owned*, at least in 
> part, separately.) Property records can probably help with this. You
> can 
> probably get shapefiles of the property boundaries from the county. 
> (Conversely, if they *aren't* separate lots, that would be an
> argument 
> for modeling them as single buildings.)
> 

They each have separate entrances, and house numbers. Public tax lot
records confirm that they are indeed separate lots.

But I'm starting to think that maybe this issue is coming down to
semantics. What exactly do we mean when we say "building" vs "house"?
The personal interpretation I am working off of is that a "building" is
the complete physical structure, whereas a "house" in the context of
the existing OSM tags (although maybe not in the general sense of the
word) is the dwelling in which someone lives.

So with this interpretation, a terrace is one building that contains
multiple houses (or dwellings, or whatever). To me, it doesn't make
sense to say that each house is a separate building.

Admittedly, I just map as a hobby, and I am not anything like a subject
matter expert, so I do not claim that these interpretations are the
"correct" ones. But I would be interested to hear if anyone else has
more knowledge or a different interpretation.

-- 
Skyler

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 20:32, Skyler Hawthorne  wrote:

>
> Maybe it wasn't clear, but what I'm suggesting isn't to remove the
> suggestion of tagging as individual building=houses, but adding another
> section that says something to the effect of "for cases where the
> terraced houses are part of a large building, and not simply attached
> houses, another approach could be this way..."
>

That depends what you mean by "large building."  The original
British terminology, and the current American terminology, is
"row house."  Houses with common side walls built in a row.

If you are suggesting using terrace to describe a topology that
isn't actually a row of houses, that would be very confusing.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

2020-07-07 Thread Matthew Woehlke

On 07/07/2020 15.24, Skyler Hawthorne wrote:

Sure thing, it's here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/42.69323/-73.69023

Huh! That's practically next door to me. There's a whole *whack* of row
houses in south Clifton Park.

A survey confirmed that they are large buildings with individual units,
rather than just a series of attached, separate homes.

This seems like a really grey area. See also notes below.

I did not take photos, as I am not comfortable taking pictures of
peoples' homes,
Google doesn't share your scruples:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6927405,-73.6883336,3a,24y,315.41h,90.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGkedvwtT8168p_D1SYKF6Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

but you can see clearly from the aerial photos that the one building
that had finished construction at the time the photo was taken shows
it as one big building.
A good question might be, do they have separate *entrances*? If not
(e.g. some condominiums), then they should possibly be tagged as
apartments. In this case, it appears the entrances are separate.

Personally, if it's possible to determine the boundaries between
properties, my inclination would be to model them as separate buildings.
(It's somewhat worth noting that townhouses are *owned*, at least in
part, separately.) Property records can probably help with this. You can
probably get shapefiles of the property boundaries from the county.
(Conversely, if they *aren't* separate lots, that would be an argument
for modeling them as single buildings.)

--
Matthew

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 19:42 +0100, Neil Matthews wrote:
> Do not change the wiki - there are many different equally valid ways
> of
> tagging terraced houses. I favour breaking terraces into individual
> dwellings/houses.

Thanks for your feedback. I'm sorry, but I think your second sentence
doesn't really follow from your first. If there are many equally valid
ways of tagging terraced houses, why not document them all in the wiki?

Maybe it wasn't clear, but what I'm suggesting isn't to remove the
suggestion of tagging as individual building=houses, but adding another
section that says something to the effect of "for cases where the
terraced houses are part of a large building, and not simply attached
houses, another approach could be this way..."

-- 
Skyler


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 19:48 +0200, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
> It seems that "terrace buildings" is used to describe both collection
> of individual buildings
> and to large building, so maybe both tagging methods are applicable.
> 
> So far all cases that I found are better described as set of
> individual similar buildings
> 
> Can you share/link photo with your case where single building is a
> better tagging?

Sure thing, it's here: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/42.69323/-73.69023

A survey confirmed that they are large buildings with individual units,
rather than just a series of attached, separate homes. I did not take
photos, as I am not comfortable taking pictures of peoples' homes, but
you can see clearly from the aerial photos that the one building that
had finished construction at the time the photo was taken shows it as
one big building.

> 
> In general - editing wiki is OK without special discussion (except
> clearly controversial cases),
> but reverting such changes is also OK.
> 
> Discussion may happen both before any edit or start after edit
> (either in "can someone look
> at edit that I just made and review it" or where someone disagrees
> with edit and 
> editors want to get more feedback).

Awesome, thanks for the response! I'll wait a bit to give more people a
chance to chime in, but the more I think about it, the more I think
that mapping large terrace buildings like this as building=terrace and
mapping each individual home as building:part=house makes the most
sense for cases like this, especially when the building as a whole has
some properties that apply to all the buildings, such as names, but
also levels, height, etc. I've personally seen other large complexes
that consist of large buildings with several housing units, and each of
the buildings are named with something like "Building A", "Building B",
etc.

--
Skyler
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

2020-07-07 Thread Neil Matthews

Do not change the wiki - there are many different equally valid ways of
tagging terraced houses. I favour breaking terraces into individual
dwellings/houses.

There are many terraces locally -- they all have individual addresses
(and UPRNs) -- some have names for the terraces that are different from
the road name and some have both a "terrace name" and an individual
housename, plus a street name.

It may be that renderers may render information repeatedly/unnecessarily
-- but that doesn't mean it's incorrect to break terraces into dwellings
--  that's what the terrace plugin is designed to do.

Best regards,
Neil





___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

It seems that "terrace buildings" is used to describe both collection of 
individual buildings
and to large building, so maybe both tagging methods are applicable.

So far all cases that I found are better described as set of individual similar 
buildings

Can you share/link photo with your case where single building is a better 
tagging?

In general - editing wiki is OK without special discussion (except clearly 
controversial cases),
but reverting such changes is also OK.

Discussion may happen both before any edit or start after edit (either in "can 
someone look
at edit that I just made and review it" or where someone disagrees with edit 
and 
editors want to get more feedback).

Jul 7, 2020, 15:06 by o...@dead10ck.com:

> I settled on using building:part=house for the individual houses and wrapping 
> the whole building with building=terrace. I think this makes more sense 
> anyway, tagging the individual houses as part of the larger building. Thanks 
> for pointing me to building:part=*!
>
> In general, how should one approach making an edit to the wiki? If I wanted 
> to suggest this approach in the wiki, should I start a separate email thread 
> to discuss this tagging scheme before editing the wiki page?
> --
> Skyler
>
>
> On July 7, 2020 07:22:02 Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>>
>>> On 6. Jul 2020, at 22:42, Joseph Eisenberg  
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> According to the wiki page about building=terrace, it is usually best 
>>> practice to map each house as a separate area (closed way) object. 
>>>
>>> ">>> A more detailed and recommended alternative is to map each dwelling 
>>> separately using >>> building 
>>> >> house 
>>> >> at least two nodes in common for adjoining houses."
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dterrace
>>>
>>> If you map each house individually, it is not necessary to map the whole 
>>> outline of the row of houses.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> right, but the question was: how do you add a name to the ensemble? 
>>
>> I.e. an entity is required where the name can be attached to.
>> An alternative could be to add addr:housename to the individual houses, but 
>> it would not exactly be the same thing. It would look like many adjacent 
>> houses which all bear the same name.
>>
>> Cheers Martin 
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names




Jul 7, 2020, 13:20 by dieterdre...@gmail.com:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
>
>> On 6. Jul 2020, at 22:42, Joseph Eisenberg  
>> wrote:
>>
>> According to the wiki page about building=terrace, it is usually best 
>> practice to map each house as a separate area (closed way) object. 
>>
>> ">> A more detailed and recommended alternative is to map each dwelling 
>> separately using >> building 
>> >> =>> house 
>> >> , but keeping 
>> at least two nodes in common for adjoining houses."
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dterrace
>>
>> If you map each house individually, it is not necessary to map the whole 
>> outline of the row of houses.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> right, but the question was: how do you add a name to the ensemble? 
>
> I.e. an entity is required where the name can be attached to.
> An alternative could be to add addr:housename to the individual houses, but 
> it would not exactly be the same thing. It would look like many adjacent 
> houses which all bear the same name.
>
Is the name applied to the building set or a residential area? Maybe it can be 
added to
landuse=residential?

If it applying to entire row then repeating it on each building would be 
probably incorrect.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names



sent from a phone

> On 7. Jul 2020, at 15:08, Skyler Hawthorne  wrote:
> 
> If I wanted to suggest this approach in the wiki, should I start a separate 
> email thread to discuss this tagging scheme before editing the wiki page?


you do not need a separate thread, but changes like this should be discussed 
IMHO.
FWIW, I would be in favor.

Cheers Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

I settled on using building:part=house for the individual houses and 
wrapping the whole building with building=terrace. I think this makes more 
sense anyway, tagging the individual houses as part of the larger building. 
Thanks for pointing me to building:part=*!


In general, how should one approach making an edit to the wiki? If I wanted 
to suggest this approach in the wiki, should I start a separate email 
thread to discuss this tagging scheme before editing the wiki page?

--
Skyler
On July 7, 2020 07:22:02 Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:



sent from a phone


On 6. Jul 2020, at 22:42, Joseph Eisenberg  wrote:
According to the wiki page about building=terrace, it is usually best 
practice to map each house as a separate area (closed way) object.


"A more detailed and recommended alternative is to map each dwelling 
separately using building=house, but keeping at least two nodes in common 
for adjoining houses."


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dterrace

If you map each house individually, it is not necessary to map the whole 
outline of the row of houses.




right, but the question was: how do you add a name to the ensemble?

I.e. an entity is required where the name can be attached to.
An alternative could be to add addr:housename to the individual houses, but 
it would not exactly be the same thing. It would look like many adjacent 
houses which all bear the same name.


Cheers Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Central European insight needed: cukrászda, cukrárna, cukiernia, ciastkarnia, cukráreň, pasticceria, konditorei, patisserie, ...

2020-07-07 Thread bkil

Should this be tagged amenity=fast_food? Its name contains the word
"restaurant" and these are proper cooked meals similar to what one
makes at home, but they cook large batches, so people can just sit in
and have a bowl of pagpag with no delay:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-42990661/how-meat-is-recycled-and-sold-to-the-poor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagpag

Also, how would you differentiate this from McDonald's (if at all), by
introducing a new tag fast_food=pagpag, or perhaps with
cuisine=pagpag? (I can find a few occurrences in name and name:en but
that's not the proper place)

On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 8:19 PM 德泉 談 via Tagging
 wrote:
>
> 在 2020年7月2日 星期四 上午7:18 [GMT+8]， Paul Allen< pla16...@gmail.com> 寫道：
> > On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 23:59, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> > wrote:
> >> On 2. Jul 2020, at 00:44, Paul Allen  wrote:
> >>
> >>> I cannot deny the possibility, but I have never seen a takeaway
> >>> kebab shop with seats for queuing customers.
> >>
> >> typical configuration in such places around here is a board (“table”)
> >> attached to the wall and bar stools. You can use it while waiting but
> >> also to eat if you want.
> >
> > example pic with limited outdoor and indoor seating, typical situation:
> >
> > I've never seen anything like that with a takeaway.  Cafes, yes.  Seats
> > outside used when it's sunny, seats inside used when it's raining.  Not
> > any takeway that I recall.
>
> It's interesting to find the difference of the food shops between different 
> nations, I'm surprised that seats for the takeaway queue is not common in 
> your place. Let me introduce the Taiwanese fried chicken shop.
>
> Localize fried chicken shop in my hometown is very common. (Note that 
> although everyone call it fried chicken shop but they sell fired vegetables 
> and seafood too.) This kind of shops usually only for takeout, and don't have 
> seats. They sell fast food, but they actually not fast.
>
> https://www.facebook.com/104450897586160/photos/a.158539162177333/229840271713888/?type=3
>
> Upper page is the most famous fried chicken shop in my hometown. They will 
> give you a number paper and you have to wait at least 50 minutes at the peak 
> hour to get your food, so they provide some seats for those who are waiting 
> for their chicken.
>
> https://imgur.com/BtUnsdM
>
> This is a new shop nearby my home and I still need to wait 6 minutes for 
> frying the chicken so they also provide seats.
>
> I've taken a look and wanted to know how local mapper in my hometown tagged 
> this kind of shop, and made me funny that one is shop=kiosk, and other are 
> shop=deli (may be the translation problem of iD editor). Only very few of 
> them are amenity=fast_food. I think that local mapper may think that 
> amenity=fast_food is for McDonald KFC or MOS burger some place you can sit in 
> it.
>
> I think that I would call McDonald or MOS burger "fast food restaurant" and 
> the "fast food shop" is for upper examples.
>
> -Tan
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names

sent from a phone

> On 6. Jul 2020, at 22:42, Joseph Eisenberg  wrote:
> 
> According to the wiki page about building=terrace, it is usually best 
> practice to map each house as a separate area (closed way) object. 
> 
> "A more detailed and recommended alternative is to map each dwelling 
> separately using building=house, but keeping at least two nodes in common for 
> adjoining houses."
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dterrace
> 
> If you map each house individually, it is not necessary to map the whole 
> outline of the row of houses.

right, but the question was: how do you add a name to the ensemble? 

I.e. an entity is required where the name can be attached to.
An alternative could be to add addr:housename to the individual houses, but it 
would not exactly be the same thing. It would look like many adjacent houses 
which all bear the same name.

Cheers Martin ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to map terrace buildings with names




Jul 6, 2020, 23:22 by o...@dead10ck.com:

>> I'm also, in a more general sense, raising a question about the
>> established conventions and whether it makes sense to be tagging the
>> individual units as "buildings", when they are not really buildings
>> in and of themselves, but sections of one larger building that
>> contains several other units.
>>
>
> To expand on this a bit, for example, if we are tagging a shopping
> center that has one large building which contains several individual
> shops, you tag the whole building with building=retail and amenity=* or
> shop=*, not building=shop or something like that. It's just curious
> that for terraces, the convention is to tag each individual unit as a
> building in its own right.
>
Depends on whatever it is one large building or row of attached similar
buildings.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrace
"Terraced house, a style of housing where identical individual houses are 
cojoined into rows"
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How can I tag which lane has tram tracks?