Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Stefano Maffulli]

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 3:44 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> usually the answer to this is we do not want to be merely redistributing
> authoritative data that OSM mappers can not improve.


Sorry, I am not making myself clear enough. This data can be modified and
improved by OSM mappers. It's not that different from power/switch/voltage,
primary/secondary data discussed recently or other data, like VHF channels
in harbors/waterways. It's data that is available to trained people. For
San Francisco specifically mappers can rely on the public dataset to
double-check and in other parts of the world they can follow more
appropriate rules.

It's also worth reiterating that a tag of this sort already exists in the
database, although it's not officially recognized.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 29. Dec 2018, at 22:00, Stefano Maffulli  wrote:
> 
> I want to re-iterate that the intention of this discussion is to find a way 
> to tag on OSM buildings that are **officially** defined as Soft Story by the 
> appropriate agencies.


usually the answer to this is we do not want to be merely redistributing 
authoritative data that OSM mappers can not improve. If there is an expert 
curated dataset of essentially unverifiable data, why would we want to import 
this into OSM? Can’t the people who need this data keep it in a parallel 
database and join it as needed? This will also have the advantage that the 
authoritative data remains official, because nobody is modifying it.


Cheers, Martin 



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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Stefano Maffulli]

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 12:58 AM Michael Patrick 
wrote:

> Because their may not have been very many of these left after multiple
> earthquakes?
>

Interesting theory :) There are hundreds of thousands of these sort of
buildings in California alone: it's a pretty big deal.

First, it might be noticed that the term, even in OSM, is not used in
> isolation, it is part
> of an extensive internally consistent system of terms from a survey of a
> particular part
> of the world.[...]
> In the western United States, designating a building as a 'soft_story'
> visually with the intended meaning that it was at seismic risk, you
> would be off base.
>

I want to re-iterate that the intention of this discussion is to find a way
to tag on OSM buildings that are **officially** defined as Soft Story by
the appropriate agencies. This is not about doing ground inspections and
visual recognition of buildings vulnerable to earthquakes done by random
volunteers.

They examples you gave make an interesting point. Who
> maintains this in OSM, i.e. if a retrofit is accomplished, do you
> still designate it as soft story?
>

In San Francisco we have NERT volunteers who are already maintaining data
about soft story buildings in their areas but they are not using OSM. These
volunteers look at the *official* public data from SF government and mark
things on paper, excel tables, their private google maps.

The intention here is to help the NERT volunteers to standardize on OSM
instead.


> What about addresses which
> are demo'd and new construction? Also, for various reasons,
> many, many retrofits are not done under a permit, or not
> specifically identified as a seismic retrofit.
>

Again, this doesn't apply to California. Anything done to a building in
California must go through public permits *and* laws mandate specifically
retrofitting for buildings that are by law identified as 'soft story'.
Demolished buildings and new constructions in California aren't soft story
according to law.


> However, what I think what you want to do is still
> possible and could be really, really useful, if it
> followed a format ( like one of the VSMs) that
> provided the complete set of characteristics.
>

I agree it would be cool but NERT volunteers don't have the resources for
doing this. Plus, it would be out of scope for them: the job has already
been done by San Francisco DBI already (and other DBIs across the state).

A summary of the discussion so far:

- OpenDRI used building:soft_storey=yes (and some mis-spelled variations)
- Other people in Nepal used building:irregularity:type=soft_storey
- over-namespacing is considered harmful

Given that soft storey is a characteristic of a building, I'm starting to
think that we have two  options:

1 - "soft_storey" as its own key, with values "yes" and "retrofitted". The
value "No" is redundant.
2 - soft_storey as key in the building namespace, so it is
building:soft_storey="yes" or "retrofitted"

Any thoughts?

/stef

PS

> ( another kind of soft story
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Tower_(San_Francisco)#Sinking_and_tilting_problem
> )
>

Totally different story (not storey :))
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Stefano Maffulli]

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 1:17 AM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> indeed, that's what I was suspecting. Would it be possible to give mappers
> summary advice on a short wikipage how to identify potential soft storey
> buildings? Or is this something that requires expert training?
>

This requires expert training and as I said in another message, this job
(at least in California) has already been done by the Department of
Building Inspection (DBI). The DBI releases open data with the list of soft
story buildings and the status of their retrofitting.

Regarding the choice of tag, I was looking at taginfo and the only current
> tag with some usage I have found is
> building:irregularity:type
> 
> *soft_sto*ry
> 
>

Thanks for digging these up. They seem to be in Nepal, too but they must
have been done outside of the OpenDRI initiative of Katmandu since they use
a different tag. For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/328538917
and an OpenDRI one, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/226670899

The key is not bad, but could also omit the "type" and become
> building:irregularity, or become a property
> building:irregularity:soft_storey=yes/suspected/etc,
> in case we expect more building irregularities on the same building. I
> also note the word "structure" is not in the key, there might be other
> kinds of e.g. geometric irregularities as well.
>

How is this going to work with regards to the ongoing namespace discussion?

"story" is American English, in British spelling it should be "storey" (we
> use British spelling in tag names by convention).
>

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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Do., 20. Dez. 2018 um 09:58 Uhr schrieb Michael Patrick <
geodes...@gmail.com>:

> ...'Soft_storey' is part of a rapid VSM ( Rapid Visual Screening) process
> ( see Table 3 at https://bit.ly/2S60CE6 for a global list of these, The
> U.S.A. FEMA https://bit.ly/2QKVhp5 )
> In the western United States, designating a building as a 'soft_story'
> visually with the intended meaning that it was at seismic risk, you
> would be off base. Many seismic retrofits, especially in historic
> buildings are invisible. And many with visible mitigation have
> other characteristics in the coding scheme which make them
> seriously at risk. The FEMA RVS is 388 pages because the
> assessment is not trivial. Seismic vulnerability is the sum total
> of many aspects.
>


indeed, that's what I was suspecting. Would it be possible to give mappers
summary advice on a short wikipage how to identify potential soft storey
buildings? Or is this something that requires expert training?

Regarding the choice of tag, I was looking at taginfo and the only current
tag with some usage I have found is
building:irregularity:type

*soft_sto*ry


all instances have been added at once (i.e. either import or single
individual initiative).

The key is not bad, but could also omit the "type" and become
building:irregularity, or become a property
building:irregularity:soft_storey=yes/suspected/etc,
in case we expect more building irregularities on the same building. I also
note the word "structure" is not in the key, there might be other kinds of
e.g. geometric irregularities as well.

"story" is American English, in British spelling it should be "storey" (we
use British spelling in tag names by convention).


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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Michael Patrick]

> A few years ago, there was an effort (promoted by World Bank, it seems) to
>  map buildings in OSM for Katmandu where they used key
buidling:soft_storey=yes/no.
> They never proposed a formal tag. The results of that effort is a bit
confusing and I'm not sure it's the best approach.

Because their may not have been very many of these left after multiple
earthquakes?
Wikipedia isn't probably the most authoritative source on this subject.

First, it might be noticed that the term, even in OSM, is not used in
isolation, it is part
of an extensive internally consistent system of terms from a survey of a
particular part
of the world. i.e it only helps designates the probability of hazard when
all the other
factors in that tagging / survey scheme are also noted.

'Soft_storey' is part of a rapid VSM ( Rapid Visual Screening) process
( see Table 3 at https://bit.ly/2S60CE6 for a global list of these, The
U.S.A. FEMA https://bit.ly/2QKVhp5 )
In the western United States, designating a building as a 'soft_story'
visually with the intended meaning that it was at seismic risk, you
would be off base. Many seismic retrofits, especially in historic
buildings are invisible. And many with visible mitigation have
other characteristics in the coding scheme which make them
seriously at risk. The FEMA RVS is 388 pages because the
assessment is not trivial. Seismic vulnerability is the sum total
of many aspects.

> how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

Use on of the recognized seismic VSMs that apply to the location.
GEM ( https://www.globalquakemodel.org ) is global, and has rapid
VSM survey sheets for various countries
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/1dcea4_e0c3391c6d32439188f8969ed902f0d6.pdf

>  Question for the community: does it make sense to add soft story
> information using the key building:soft_storey=y/n (similar to
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:fireproof) or should I
use
> building:structure=soft_storey?

If you intend to give meaningful accurate seismic information, it
should be the lowest level concept and only be present if the other
characteristics are included, ideally, from a survey.

> Good question. For disaster preparedness and response, it is valuable to
> have a list of soft story buildings in a neighborhood. There are multiple
> places where such buildings are mapped like 

They examples you gave make an interesting point. Who
maintains this in OSM, i.e. if a retrofit is accomplished, do you
still designate it as soft story? What about addresses which
are demo'd and new construction? Also, for various reasons,
many, many retrofits are not done under a permit, or not
specifically identified as a seismic retrofit. One of those, the city
program site, has mostly 'exempt' or 'done' entries, and those
appear on the map anyways. Same with the City of SF site,
and a quick Streetview of the few non-compliant ones show
no residential occupancy, just the ground floor retail is
open.

For disaster preparedness and response, accurate
information is important, in these cases, 'the map'
practically useless.

However, what I think what you want to do is still
possible and could be really, really useful, if it
followed a format ( like one of the VSMs) that
provided the complete set of characteristics.And
those tags should be prefaced with something like
'GEM_soft_story' that makes it clear they are part
of a set, not an end conclusion about the building's
risk. And you would have to timestamp it some way
to refresh it.

Michael Patrick

( another kind of soft story
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Tower_(San_Francisco)#Sinking_and_tilting_problem
)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mi., 19. Dez. 2018 um 11:30 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt :

>
> "soft story" is actually an attribute of the whole building, not just one
>> floor. It's a recognized classification of a structural characteristic of
>> buildings.
>>
> Yes and no.
> According to Wikipedia [1], (and using British English spelling and
> hyphenation) a soft-storey building has one ore more soft storeys (=levels
> in OSM speak).
> So if we know which level(s) are weak we need a way to map this. In case
> we only know that the building has a  "soft level" we need a different
> tagging.
>
>

weak according to what? Weaker than the rest of the structure? Weaker
against which kind of forces? Weaker than the current building code would
permit for a new construction? I can understand that an authority could
define criteria and asses buildings according to it and give them a class
like "soft storey", but this kind of generic class always implies some kind
of subjective judgement. I cannot see how this tag could be verifiable
apart from importing it from some authoritive source.

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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Volker Schmidt]

> "soft story" is actually an attribute of the whole building, not just one
> floor. It's a recognized classification of a structural characteristic of
> buildings.
>
Yes and no.
According to Wikipedia [1], (and using British English spelling and
hyphenation) a soft-storey building has one ore more soft storeys (=levels
in OSM speak).
So if we know which level(s) are weak we need a way to map this. In case we
only know that the building has a  "soft level" we need a different tagging.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_story_building
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 18. Dec 2018, at 17:59, Stefano Maffulli  wrote:
> 
> A soft story building can be identified visually by the trained eye and such 
> buildings are inherently weaker than others in earthquakes, even if they've 
> been reinforced.


then the reinforcement simply wasn’t strong enough. Technically you could 
reinforce as long as you can keep a sufficient height or have sufficient space 
remaining inside ;-) but it might not make sense economically. You could also 
construct buildings that could withstand any earthquake, but it would not be 
economical either, building is always a compromise, you won’t typically build a 
structure that would still remain stable when rotated on its side, but 
technically it would be possible. 

What I wanted to say: there will probably be a technical definition of soft 
storey, while our tag will be yes/no, in reality it will be a gradual property 
and to map it you will have to set a cutoff somewhere. That’s why there are 
inherent verifiability problems (even if you knew all the details and 
dimensions of the structure, material properties, joining details, etc.). Is 
this something you believe people should survey or should they trust an 
external source for it?


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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Tod Fitch]

> On Dec 17, 2018, at 2:17 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> The bigger problem could be verifiability. OSM is about crowd sourced geodata 
> while this property seems to require expert capabilities and additional 
> information you cannot get non-destructively on the ground?
> 

For what it is worth, the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training I 
took a while back included a session on earthquake damage including how to 
identify soft storey construction. CERT is a local citizen response system in 
the United States and seems to be implemented, sometimes with different names, 
in most cities in the country. Since earthquake response is an important thing 
in California there were a number of sessions dedicated to response including 
quick survey for levels of damage to buildings, setting up evacuation areas, 
establishing communications with the official fire/rescue/law enforcement 
agencies, etc.

All this is to say that in an earthquake prone area there are likely to be a 
fair number of people unassociated with official emergency response, building 
trades, engineering, etc., who have had at least an introduction to identifying 
buildings that are suspect for structural issues in an earthquake.

Cheers!





signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Stefano Maffulli]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 2:19 PM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> It is at least debatable, I know there are some people who love long
> structured tags, although this idea is in a minority in Osm tagging, most
> people do not use tags like this. It doesn’t seem necessary in this case to
> use a structured name, I would not expect other “soft_storey”s in different
> domains.
>

Ah! that makes sense. soft_storey=yes/no as its own key would be used also
to keep track of the status of reinforcement. (more about this below)


> The bigger problem could be verifiability. OSM is about crowd sourced
> geodata while this property seems to require expert capabilities and
> additional information you cannot get non-destructively on the ground?
>

A soft story building can be identified visually by the trained eye and
such buildings are inherently weaker than others in earthquakes, even if
they've been reinforced. That said, even among soft story buildings there
are degrees of weakness and higher rigidity is better. To address this,
there are laws and building regulations. In California, the location of
soft story buildings is shared publicly including their reinforcement
status. A soft_storey key could have value "yes" or "reinforce complete"
according to local law?

I got interested in this tag because I'm working with San Francisco NERT
volunteers to add the official SF soft story database from
https://sfdbi.org/soft-story-properties-list to OSM. Eventually, we'd like
to do a mass import but before even going close to it, I thought that first
we should reach an agreement on which key/value to use.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 17. Dec 2018, at 14:36, Sergio Manzi  wrote:
> 
> So, to be clear, you are ok with soft_storey being a sub-key of 
> building:structure (and hence building:structure:soft_storey=yes/no),


It is at least debatable, I know there are some people who love long structured 
tags, although this idea is in a minority in Osm tagging, most people do not 
use tags like this. It doesn’t seem necessary in this case to use a structured 
name, I would not expect other “soft_storey”s in different domains.

The bigger problem could be verifiability. OSM is about crowd sourced geodata 
while this property seems to require expert capabilities and additional 
information you cannot get non-destructively on the ground?

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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Sergio Manzi]

So, to be clear, you are ok with soft_storey being a *sub-key* of 
building:structure (and hence building:structure:soft_storey=yes/no), but not 
it being a *value* (building:structure=soft_storey)?

If this is the case... we perfectly agree! :-)

Cheers!


On 2018-12-17 14:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 17. Dec 2018, at 13:34, Sergio Manzi mailto:s...@smz.it>> 
> wrote:
>
>> I added emphasys to part of your quote to underline how I fail to understand 
>> how a "structural detail" cannot be construed as a sub-key of... structure.
>
>
> you should rather have looked at the whole thread, I was replying to this 
> paragraph by the OT: “I'm not convinced soft_storey should be its own key or 
> rather a structural characteristic of a building. For example, 
> building:structure is widely used to tell if buildings are made of masonry, 
> reinforced concrete, etc. It would make sense for soft_storey to be a value 
> of that key.  https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building:structure”
>
>
> Cheers, Martin


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 17. Dec 2018, at 13:34, Sergio Manzi  wrote:
> 
> I added emphasys to part of your quote to underline how I fail to understand 
> how a "structural detail" cannot be construed as a sub-key of... structure.


you should rather have looked at the whole thread, I was replying to this 
paragraph by the OT: “I'm not convinced soft_storey should be its own key or 
rather a structural characteristic of a building. For example, 
building:structure is widely used to tell if buildings are made of masonry, 
reinforced concrete, etc. It would make sense for soft_storey to be a value of 
that key.  https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building:structure”


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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Sergio Manzi]

Hello Martin,

On 2018-12-17 11:32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> yes, _*it is a structural detail*_ (insufficient stiffening/strutting, if I 
> interpret it correctly), that's why it is _*not suitable as a value for 
> building:structure*_, as that key is about the structural system, not about 
> implementation details.

I added emphasys to part of your quote to underline how I fail to understand 
how a "structural detail" cannot be construed as a sub-key of... structure.

Cheers,

Sergio



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mo., 17. Dez. 2018 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Stefano Maffulli <
smaffu...@gmail.com>:

> On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 1:17 AM Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> no, this clearly isn’t a suitable key because the soft story property
>> from what you wrote above is about a structural detail in some floors while
>> building structure is about the general structural system of a building or
>> part of it.
>>
>
> "soft story" is actually an attribute of the whole building, not just one
> floor. It's a recognized classification of a structural characteristic of
> buildings.
>


yes, it is a structural detail (insufficient stiffening/strutting, if I
interpret it correctly), that's why it is not suitable as a value for
building:structure, as that key is about the structural system, not about
implementation details. I did not say it may or may not be tagged, I just
said the proposed key is not suitable.




>
>
> So far, building:soft_storey:y/n seems to be the least controversial way
> to tag these buildings. Any other thoughts?
>


the tag seems OK for what you intend to tag, one remaining problem could be
verifiability. Are there objective criteria, e.g. who defines the cutoff
where a building is still deemed sufficiently stiff, and when is it not? In
some building law, the required stiffness will depend on the risk zone for
earthquakes. Will the application of this tag depend on the jurisdiction?
Will we have to retag all buildings if the definitions change? Will we be
able to survey this, or does it require structural documentation and the
knowledge to evaluate it?

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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Sergio Manzi]

Yeah... you're right...

"/Buildings are classified as having a "soft story" if that level is less than 
70% as stiff as the floor immediately above it, or less than 80% as stiff as 
the average stiffness of the three floors above it./" [1]

hard to eyeball that...

But the key would be right for importing such information from some official 
source.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_story_building


On 2018-12-17 03:32, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Is "soft storey" something that is officially declared, or would it only be 
> based on an individual mappers opinion?
>
> As it refers to the possibly enhanced danger of a building collapsing during 
> an earthquake, are we leaving ourselves open to potential complaints from a 
> building owner that we have listed that building as "dangerous", usually 
> based solely on an external viewing by a (probably) unqualified person?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> On 2018-12-17 00:42, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
>
>> So far, building:soft_storey:y/n seems to be the least controversial way 
>> to tag these buildings. 
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Is "soft storey" something that is officially declared, or would it only be
based on an individual mappers opinion?

As it refers to the possibly enhanced danger of a building collapsing
during an earthquake, are we leaving ourselves open to potential complaints
from a building owner that we have listed that building as "dangerous",
usually based solely on an external viewing by a (probably) unqualified
person?

Thanks

Graeme


On 2018-12-17 00:42, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
>
> So far, building:soft_storey:y/n seems to be the least controversial way
> to tag these buildings.
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Sergio Manzi]

For what is worth, it sounds good to me.

If you want to be even more precise and "/taxonomist/-minded", it could be 
building:structure:soft_storey=yes/no (/no being the default value/).

Sergio


On 2018-12-17 00:42, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> So far, building:soft_storey:y/n seems to be the least controversial way to 
> tag these buildings. Any other thoughts?


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Stefano Maffulli]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 1:17 AM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> no, this clearly isn’t a suitable key because the soft story property from
> what you wrote above is about a structural detail in some floors while
> building structure is about the general structural system of a building or
> part of it.
>

"soft story" is actually an attribute of the whole building, not just one
floor. It's a recognized classification of a structural characteristic of
buildings.

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 1:35 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> What is really trying to be tagged?
>

Good question. For disaster preparedness and response, it is valuable to
have a list of soft story buildings in a neighborhood. There are multiple
places where such buildings are mapped like https://sfdbi.org/softstory,
http://softstory.openoakland.org/,
http://www.ladbs.org/services/core-services/plan-check-permit/plan-check-permit-special-assistance/mandatory-retrofit-programs/soft-story-retrofit-program


> The earthquake susceptibility of a building/structure? In that case use
> some words to indicate that?
> earthquake_susceptibility=soft_story ?
>
> There are other things that are earthquake susceptible too, so it needs to
> be able tag them too.
>

Sounds like it would be complicating the model. There are too many ways by
which a building would be susceptible to quakes.

So far, building:soft_storey:y/n seems to be the least controversial way to
tag these buildings. Any other thoughts? I'll propose it for formal review
if there are no major blockers.

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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Warin]

On 16/12/18 20:15, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:



sent from a phone

On 15. Dec 2018, at 23:47, Stefano Maffulli > wrote:


For example, building:structure is widely used to tell if buildings 
are made of masonry, reinforced concrete, etc. It would make sense 
for soft_storey to be a value of that key. 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building:structure



no, this clearly isn’t a suitable key because the soft story property 
from what you wrote above is about a structural detail in some floors 
while building structure is about the general structural system of a 
building or part of it. Using the same key would lead to either or 
decisions where both should be taggable.




What is really trying to be tagged?
The earthquake susceptibility of a building/structure? In that case use 
some words to indicate that?

earthquake_susceptibility=soft_story ?

There are other things that are earthquake susceptible too, so it needs 
to be able tag them too.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 15. Dec 2018, at 23:47, Stefano Maffulli  wrote:
> 
> For example, building:structure is widely used to tell if buildings are made 
> of masonry, reinforced concrete, etc. It would make sense for soft_storey to 
> be a value of that key.  
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building:structure


no, this clearly isn’t a suitable key because the soft story property from what 
you wrote above is about a structural detail in some floors while building 
structure is about the general structural system of a building or part of it. 
Using the same key would lead to either or decisions where both should be 
taggable.

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

Re: [Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 10:49 PM Stefano Maffulli 
wrote:

>
> Question for the community: does it make sense to add soft story
> information using the key building:soft_storey=y/n (similar to
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:fireproof) or should I
> use building:structure=soft_storey?
>

Ask yourself how you'd handle a concrete soft story building and I think
the answer is clear.  And it's
also clear that building:structure is not really a good key for dealing
with concrete/masonry, and that
building:material might have been better.  But that decision was made too
long ago to change now.
Since soft story and concrete are kinda orthogonal, using
building:structure to handle both is
problematic and will only lead to another battle over semicolons.

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