Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 22.01.19 22:18, Tobias Zwick wrote: > First, I am still in the dark a bit how this affects SIT with S3DB > compatibility, perhaps Tordanik can explain. My comment regarding S3DB compatibility was about the related issues that were brought up in this thread (e.g. indoor features outside of a

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 02:44:50PM +0100, Tobias Zwick wrote: > I stumbled upon a real-world example yesterday that may make the attempt > to have the level-tag describe a "global" order (as used in OpenLevelUp, > JOSM etc.) somewhat impractical - with that level-selector UI element: > > So,

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 2019-01-20 05:49, Tobias Zwick wrote: Hi there, In the wiki, the level tag is defined to be a 0-based-index so that level=0 is the ground floor, i.e. at the street level. In other words, a two-storey mall with no basement will have shops at level=0 and level=1. This is intuitive for (at

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

I stumbled upon a real-world example yesterday that may make the attempt to have the level-tag describe a "global" order (as used in OpenLevelUp, JOSM etc.) somewhat impractical - with that level-selector UI element: So, Hamburg is a really flat city. And even still, the mall "Europa Passage"

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

See the original page on the Karlsruher schema: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema Am 23.01.2019 um 05:04 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:11 PM Simon Poole > wrote: > > [...] addr tags are for

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 10:18:51PM +0100, Tobias Zwick wrote: > On 22/01/2019 10:47, Lionel Giard wrote: > > So, i'm really in favor of the level=* for a "data user friendly" tag > > (that could correspond to local numbering, but not always) and a special > > tag for the local levels. At this

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

> > One reason that's of particular interest to me is that SIT is intended > to be compatible with 3D rendering, allowing for the creation of 3D > models that represent both the inside and outside of buildings at the > same time. > > At the moment, Simple 3D Buildings has no support for "half"

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:11 PM Simon Poole wrote: > [...] addr tags are for postal addresses I don't think using them as a > level name/ref makes very much sense outside of that very narrow > application. > I rechecked the two main OSM Wiki pages[1][2] on addr:*=* tags and addresses in general

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 22/01/2019 10:47, Lionel Giard wrote: > So, i'm really in favor of the level=* for a "data user friendly" tag > (that could correspond to local numbering, but not always) and a special > tag for the local levels. At this moment i would see a *local level tag > *like "level:ref=*" or

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

As pointed out for underground station, the building outline doesn't always cover the underground levels (i.e. the underground levels can extend far beyond the building limit (and potentially under other buildings/roads...). We find this problem for metro station, train station or other buildings

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 21.01.19 22:38, Roland Olbricht wrote: > I do consider both to be SIT compliant. I'm not sure if it's clear from the written text of SIT, but neither fractional levels nor indoor features outside of a building outline were part of SIT's design. (And yes, these are obvious omissions that will

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

Hi Tobias, thank you for keeping the discussion. One extra thing I have just learned is that non-numerical level refs are not-so-uncommon in the US, hence should be covered by a tool to be helpful there. > I do not want to sound so combative or negative here - to reason > for why a new tag

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 21/01/2019 09:19, PanierAvide wrote: > Just for your information, there is also this "level:ref" tag which was > used in various context to solve this problem I know of "level:ref". However, on the SIT wiki page, "level:ref" is documented as a tag for the level-outline tagged with

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 20/01/2019 23:39, Tobias Knerr wrote: > The main challenge I see with your proposal, though, is that the > levels=* tag on the building would be utterly required to make any sense > of the order of floors. Without it, applications would have no idea > whether "M" is above or below "P2", for

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

Yes it makes sense to keep this distinction : level tag can just be the "logical order" of levels going from -xx to xx with an arbitrary 0 for each building, so tools know the order (which one is above the other). Simple Indoor Tagging already suggest the level:ref for the "local" naming scheme.

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

Am So., 20. Jan. 2019 um 23:41 Uhr schrieb Tobias Knerr : > On 20.01.19 19:37, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > - a shop on level M with "level=M" > > > > - the mall building with "levels=P2,P1,G,M,1-12,14-99" (the order of the > > levels). If levels is missing, a numerical order is assumed > > So

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

Am So., 20. Jan. 2019 um 18:07 Uhr schrieb Roland Olbricht < roland.olbri...@gmx.de>: > we have here in Wuppertal, Germany at least three indoor-tagged > structures that have street level entrances at multiple levels, making > "street level" a not-at-all defined concept. +1, also from my

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

Hello, Just for your information, there is also this "level:ref" tag which was used in various context to solve this problem : - level tag is still used as defined in Simple Indoor Tagging - level:ref has a value which is linked to operator naming of levels That way, casual mappers/consumers

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

As tordanik has already pointed out the main issue with the proposals is that there is no inherent ordering that can be deduced from level values on objects if they are not (integer) numbers, so any such scheme requires far more insight, effort and available context from joe-casual-mapper and

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

>M (for mezzanine) is often in between G and 2, and often but not always has some notion of being less than a proper full floor Speaking of which many editors, users, editing software, tenderer and such seems to assume levels must be integer which is not necessary to be correct. For instance, I

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

Here's a perhaps-radical set of comments and suggestion: in any building, there is a set of names (which often but not always look like numbers) for levels. These are evident in the elevators (buttons inside, matching values outside) and in things painted on walls, on room numbers. etc

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

I've seen a similar issue with a shop in our area https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/351561908#map=19/-28.08993/153.45070 The street address is 15 Park Avenue, but the only thing there is the car park, with staff entry, goods lift & customer stairs & lift, but that should (?) be level=0 as that

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 at 16:58, Tobias Zwick wrote: > Well, all of which I mentioned is optional. But I can come up with two > use cases for wanting to know which level is the ground level: > > 1. Localization > > In an application, it is much nicer to be able to write > "ground floor" (en-GB),

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 20.01.19 19:37, Tobias Zwick wrote: > - a shop on level M with "level=M" > > - the mall building with "levels=P2,P1,G,M,1-12,14-99" (the order of the > levels). If levels is missing, a numerical order is assumed So essentially, one uses the local level reference in level=*, and provides a

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 10:57:47PM +0100, Tobias Zwick wrote: > >> - also the building with "ground_level=G" to define which level is > >> the ground level. If ground_level is missing, 0 is assumed. > >> > > Do we really need a ground level? I think not. We need connections to > > outside ways

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

>> - also the building with "ground_level=G" to define which level is >> the ground level. If ground_level is missing, 0 is assumed. >> > Do we really need a ground level? I think not. We need connections to > outside ways and entrances. Well, all of which I mentioned is optional. But I can

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 07:37:23PM +0100, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > So from a SIT perspective, the problem isn't that the US (and other > > places) call the ground level "1". It's that the level below that is > > called "-1" rather than "0". You could still make it compatible with > > Simple Indoor

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 2:38 AM Tobias Zwick 2. no calculating forth- and back between level "indices" and real names >for the levels (for neither the software nor the mapper) because this >effectively eliminates the concept of indices > I use level=* for the machine-readable zero-based

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 1/20/19 11:06, Roland Olbricht wrote: > we have here in Wuppertal, Germany at least three indoor-tagged > structures that have street level entrances at multiple levels, making > "street level" a not-at-all defined concept. In case of the university > e.g. the main entrance is on level 7, and

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

> So from a SIT perspective, the problem isn't that the US (and other > places) call the ground level "1". It's that the level below that is > called "-1" rather than "0". You could still make it compatible with > Simple Indoor Tagging by adding a skipped_levels=0 tag to the building, > but this

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 20/01/2019 18:06, Roland Olbricht wrote: > we have here in Wuppertal, Germany at least three indoor-tagged > structures that have street level entrances at multiple levels, making > "street level" a not-at-all defined concept. In case of the university > e.g. the main entrance is on level 7,

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 20.01.19 18:06, Roland Olbricht wrote: > I am also a bit surprised: a common interpretation of the text of > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_Indoor_Tagging > (which is where https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:level > refers to) is that the level tag keeps the level numbering

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

Hi Tobias, we have here in Wuppertal, Germany at least three indoor-tagged structures that have street level entrances at multiple levels, making "street level" a not-at-all defined concept. In case of the university e.g. the main entrance is on level 7, and street level entrances range from

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

Maybe. My point though is that the (un)intuitiveness of this definition will be a constant source of error because as shops close and new shops open, the data is changing and thus the potential for error remains. (With incomplete software support.) Turns out, it is even a problem in countries

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 20.01.19 14:49, Tobias Zwick wrote: > 2. generally, tagging definitions that are not intuitive to use (in a > region) will not be used consistently (in that region), leading to > ambiguous data. I believe the high number of (potential) errors is temporary, resulting from the relative lack of

Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On Sun, Jan 20, 2019, 9:50 PM Tobias Zwick Region| likely zero-based | likely one-based > --|---|- > Washington, Philadelphia, NY | 3 |2 > Silicon valley, Los Angeles | 4

[Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

Hi there, In the wiki, the level tag is defined to be a 0-based-index so that level=0 is the ground floor, i.e. at the street level. In other words, a two-storey mall with no basement will have shops at level=0 and level=1. This is intuitive for (at least) Europeans, people from Commonwealth