Re: [Tagging] question: best practices for micromapping ped areas and footpaths?
2014-12-30 11:50 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com: make the entire area highway=pedestrian and have the building=roof are on a layer above it? I would go for this option. +1, I'd normally use a multipolygon relation to represent the roof if it has the same extent as the pedestrian area below (to avoid overlapping ways). You could go for covered=xxx as well, as Hubert indicated +1, on the pedestrian area below. See this as an attribute (this space is covered). You could have the roof anyway as an additional object (e.g. to add details about the roof) or have the covered-key on the pedestrian area to indicate some kind of covering (i.e. the roof could be mapped either explicitly or implicitly). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] question: best practices for micromapping ped areas and footpaths?
johnw jo...@mac.com writes: 1) there are large open concrete areas for pedestrians, but there are also covered walkways through them as well. http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/36.38380/139.07281 I mapped the open sections as highway=pedestrian+area=yes, while I traced the covered walkways (that connect the bus shelters) and tagged it as building=roof highway=footway I'm not sure if I should just create single area of highway=pedestrian and put the building=roof over it or what. Also, the roof doesn't render as a building, but as a white pedestrian area. I think if it is tagged at building=roof, I should ask -carto to render it as a building, but it logically remains a footpath as well. Given that there are specific places intended for walking, I would create ways for them and tag those as highway=footway. Then an area for the roof, and another area for the entire pedestrian area. The point of having separate ways is twofold: there really are paths that are more important than the broad area renderers and navigation programs that don't cope with areas will route people along the paths. Which even if there is an area, will seem natural to the people (Arguably, translating OSM to devices that lack concepts of routable areas should add implicit paths from every area/way junction to every other.) pgplOnOISw1lK.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] question: best practices for micromapping ped areas and footpaths?
On Dec 30, 2014, at 4:29 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:27 AM, johnw jo...@mac.com mailto:jo...@mac.com wrote: I mapped the open sections as highway=pedestrian+area=yes, while I traced the covered walkways (that connect the bus shelters) and tagged it as building=roof highway=footway For me this means that you walk on the roof. You should have 2 separate OSM objects, one for the roof and one for the footway. The roof should be tagged as building=roof, layer=1. Ahh, I see - that makes sense. so, I should leave the pedestrain areas as they are, and add an additional area for the roof (so I would have two areas - one the footpath and the other a roof with the adjacent areas as pedestrian) or make the entire area highway=pedestrian and have the building=roof are on a layer above it? BTW, highway=pedestrian+area=yes does not play nice with the layer tag - it renders over everything else, even when separated by layers (last time I checked). does this mean I should tag it in some other (more correct) fashion, or is this simply a rendering error that needs to be resolved and I should refrain from tagging for the renderer? Javbw regards m ___ 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] question: best practices for micromapping ped areas and footpaths?
Hallo. Maybe covered=yes http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:covered is what you are looking for? Yours Hubert Am 30. Dezember 2014 05:27:43 MEZ, schrieb johnw jo...@mac.com: I'm micromapping some public areas, in this case train stations. two questions: 1) there are large open concrete areas for pedestrians, but there are also covered walkways through them as well. http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/36.38380/139.07281 I mapped the open sections as highway=pedestrian+area=yes, while I traced the covered walkways (that connect the bus shelters) and tagged it as building=roof highway=footway I'm not sure if I should just create single area of highway=pedestrian and put the building=roof over it or what. Also, the roof doesn't render as a building, but as a white pedestrian area. I think if it is tagged at building=roof, I should ask -carto to render it as a building, but it logically remains a footpath as well. I'm unsure of how to tag it all. I assume I have made a mistake mixing pedestrian and footway tags. 2) what is the best practices for tracing sidewalks? when following a sidewalk along a road, and you reach an intersection, does the footpath way cross the road via the sidewalk (continuing along the road, or does it turn the corner, following the sidewalk encompassing the block, and the sidewalks are separate ways ( rather than a node) that join disparate footpaths at the corners of the intersection? This is an intersection mapped with footpaths following the sidewalks around the block, with sidewalk ways connecting the corners at the intersection. http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/36.42339/139.05830 I'm guessing for simplicity, the way follows the street through the intersections, but to map the sidewalk as a way would require segmentation of the ways anyways, so following the sidewalk around the corner seems to be a cleaner choice, especially with the heavy paint work here in Japan for sidewalks. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] question: best practices for micromapping ped areas and footpaths?
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 9:40 AM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: make the entire area highway=pedestrian and have the building=roof are on a layer above it? I would go for this option. You could go for covered=xxx as well, as Hubert indicated BTW, highway=pedestrian+area=yes does not play nice with the layer tag - it renders over everything else, even when separated by layers (last time I checked). does this mean I should tag it in some other (more correct) fashion, or is this simply a rendering error that needs to be resolved and I should refrain from tagging for the renderer? I consider this as a render issue. regards m ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] question: best practices for micromapping ped areas and footpaths?
2014-12-30 9:40 GMT+01:00 johnw jo...@mac.com: Ahh, I see - that makes sense. so, I should leave the pedestrain areas as they are, and add an additional area for the roof (so I would have two areas - one the footpath and the other a roof with the adjacent areas as pedestrian) or make the entire area highway=pedestrian and have the building=roof are on a layer above it? BTW, highway=pedestrian+area=yes does not play nice with the layer tag - it renders over everything else, even when separated by layers (last time I checked). does this mean I should tag it in some other (more correct) fashion, or is this simply a rendering error that needs to be resolved and I should refrain from tagging for the renderer? This is deliberate, and was explained in a mail in June: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-June/018043.html highway=pedestrian + area=yes will always be over everything else. There's nothing you can do about it, except make your own renderer :) Or try to change their minds here: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/688 As for your mapping, If you ask me, it would be better to map sidewalks as lines tagged with highway=footway. That makes it much easier for routers to get you to your wanted platform. If you really want to map sidewalk areas, you can tag them as area:highway=footway. It's currently just a proposed tag, but I think its philosophy is the best so far for mapping areas of highways. Janko ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] question: best practices for micromapping ped areas and footpaths?
On 30 December 2014 at 11:14, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: This is deliberate, and was explained in a mail in June: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-June/018043.html highway=pedestrian + area=yes will always be over everything else. There's nothing you can do about it, except make your own renderer :) Or try to change their minds here: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/688 Note that this issue is still open, which means we recognize this is a problem with the rendering. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] question: best practices for micromapping ped areas and footpaths?
I'm micromapping some public areas, in this case train stations. two questions: 1) there are large open concrete areas for pedestrians, but there are also covered walkways through them as well. http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/36.38380/139.07281 I mapped the open sections as highway=pedestrian+area=yes, while I traced the covered walkways (that connect the bus shelters) and tagged it as building=roof highway=footway I'm not sure if I should just create single area of highway=pedestrian and put the building=roof over it or what. Also, the roof doesn't render as a building, but as a white pedestrian area. I think if it is tagged at building=roof, I should ask -carto to render it as a building, but it logically remains a footpath as well. I'm unsure of how to tag it all. I assume I have made a mistake mixing pedestrian and footway tags. 2) what is the best practices for tracing sidewalks? when following a sidewalk along a road, and you reach an intersection, does the footpath way cross the road via the sidewalk (continuing along the road, or does it turn the corner, following the sidewalk encompassing the block, and the sidewalks are separate ways ( rather than a node) that join disparate footpaths at the corners of the intersection? This is an intersection mapped with footpaths following the sidewalks around the block, with sidewalk ways connecting the corners at the intersection. http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/36.42339/139.05830 I'm guessing for simplicity, the way follows the street through the intersections, but to map the sidewalk as a way would require segmentation of the ways anyways, so following the sidewalk around the corner seems to be a cleaner choice, especially with the heavy paint work here in Japan for sidewalks. Javbw ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] question: best practices for micromapping ped areas and footpaths?
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 5:27 AM, johnw jo...@mac.com wrote: I mapped the open sections as highway=pedestrian+area=yes, while I traced the covered walkways (that connect the bus shelters) and tagged it as building=roof highway=footway For me this means that you walk on the roof. You should have 2 separate OSM objects, one for the roof and one for the footway. The roof should be tagged as building=roof, layer=1. regards m ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
