Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
On 21/08/2009 15:04, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2009/8/21 David Earl : >> And in any case, I think there's something to be said for these large >> retail warehouses being marked differently from a shop. I think it is a >> perfectly valid way to do it, and as a side effect it gets these large >> landmarks on named on the map when simple shops aren't. > > if you tag the outline (AREA) instead of a node, you'll get their > names as well on the (rendered) map as long as they are big enough. I > think that's the best approach (because you get the visibility > correlated to the size of the area). I don't see why you have to add a > node to label them. Yes I know, and I do that where approrpiate. But the discussion was about the case when you have a large block of same occupied by a number of different occupants. So you already have a large landuse=retail (or building=shop or some such) which may have its own name (Thingummy Shopping Centre) enclosing these nodes (e.g. Homebase). Dividing up the area doesn't reflect the reality on the ground (it's one industrial estate, one strip mall etc). Sometimes you can put buildings inside the landuse, and that's fine, but sometimes it is all one building with multiple occupants - and in any case, most of the areas I'm working in don't have Yahoo images, so I can't get decent individual building outlines in most cases. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
2009/8/21 David Earl : > And in any case, I think there's something to be said for these large > retail warehouses being marked differently from a shop. I think it is a > perfectly valid way to do it, and as a side effect it gets these large > landmarks on named on the map when simple shops aren't. if you tag the outline (AREA) instead of a node, you'll get their names as well on the (rendered) map as long as they are big enough. I think that's the best approach (because you get the visibility correlated to the size of the area). I don't see why you have to add a node to label them. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
On 20/08/2009 22:12, Roy Wallace wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:30 AM, David Earl > wrote: >> On 20/08/2009 15:27, Peter Körner wrote: IN such circumstances I use building=... or landuse=retail to outline the combined structure or area, and then use landuse=retail NODES within them to label each unit >>> How can a node be of any "landuse" - it's no land, just a 0-dimensional >>> point.. >> You're reading too much into the word, as so often happens with tags IMO. >> >> Very often nodes are used as place-holders for more complete data later. >> Churches, for example, are often large structures but most are >> represented by nodes. > > But a church is still tagged as a church. This is not the same as > tagging a business as a "landuse node". Actually, it's tagged as 'amenity'. The key bit is the value, 'place_of_worship', and likewise the key bit of the landuse is 'retail'. But again, you're being overly literal about the wording of tags. The tag name (as opposed to the value) isn't very helpful or useful in many cases. And in any case, I think there's something to be said for these large retail warehouses being marked differently from a shop. I think it is a perfectly valid way to do it, and as a side effect it gets these large landmarks on named on the map when simple shops aren't. I'm just saying that's the way I'm doing it in answer to someone's question. If you want to do it differently that's your prerogative. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:30 AM, David Earl wrote: > On 20/08/2009 15:27, Peter Körner wrote: >>> IN such circumstances I use building=... or landuse=retail to outline >>> the combined structure or area, and then use landuse=retail NODES >>> within them to label each unit >> >> How can a node be of any "landuse" - it's no land, just a 0-dimensional >> point.. > > You're reading too much into the word, as so often happens with tags IMO. > > Very often nodes are used as place-holders for more complete data later. > Churches, for example, are often large structures but most are > represented by nodes. But a church is still tagged as a church. This is not the same as tagging a business as a "landuse node". ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions (new branch)
-- > Since this has been so helpful, I'd like to ask for advice on another > question. In an urban/suburban setting (Tampa, Florida, US), where > sidewalks are discontinuous (some blocks have them on both sides, some > blocks only on one, some on neither), what is the preferred way to map > and tag this? I have been tracing the actual sidewalks onto the map, but > I have recently discovered that it is possible to tag streets to add > "footway=left" or right or both, with the implication that if there is > no footway tag then there are no footways. It would be better to attach the footway / sidewalk information to the associated street / highway - this won't render today, but may in the future. I have been using the 'sidewalk' tag, because that was the first proposed feature I found at the time. That all may be sorted out in the future, and hopefully someone can automatically set these to the final recommendations. That sort of information is useful in the US because there are areas and eras of construction in which sidewalks were 'in', then 'out', now they're back 'in'. So one could envision a quick reference for 'neighborhoods with sidewalks'. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions (new branch)
On 20/08/2009 04:53, David Earl wrote: >On 20/08/2009 04:03, Andrew Ayre wrote: >> Roy Wallace wrote: If I draw the outline of a strip mall (a connected string of shops) this represents several businesses together. If I then put nodes on them and give the nodes names Mapnik won't render the names unless they are amenities. But not all businesses are amenities. >... >> However, if business names don't appear on the online maps which most >> people will use, I'm not sure how good an investment of my time it is to >> go around photographing buildings and adding the names. I want what I >> do to benefit the most people. > >IN such circumstances I use building=... or landuse=retail to outline >the combined structure or area, and then use landuse=retail NODES within >them to label each unit (I don't do it for everything, usually just the >larger ones, but that's me being lazy rather than any particular principle). > >The thing is, the Mapnik rendering does indeed render these (ditto >landuse=industrial to pick out individual industrial units in an estate). > >Examples: >http://osm.org/go/0ESQxVuz > >I think building=...+name=... is also rendered for building tags on >nodes, though that's less appropriate in these circumstances. Useful >though when you can't get or reasonably estimate the outline, but it's >obviously second best. > >David Thank you all for this discussion. It has been very helpful to me (living and mapping in a city full of strip malls). I concur that a way to tag offices would be helpful. Since this has been so helpful, I'd like to ask for advice on another question. In an urban/suburban setting (Tampa, Florida, US), where sidewalks are discontinuous (some blocks have them on both sides, some blocks only on one, some on neither), what is the preferred way to map and tag this? I have been tracing the actual sidewalks onto the map, but I have recently discovered that it is possible to tag streets to add "footway=left" or right or both, with the implication that if there is no footway tag then there are no footways. Anyway, I would appreciate comments and suggestions on the best way to handle this, especially in the car-centric environment here. Ed Hillsman ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
2009/8/20 David Earl : > Oh, and one more thing: consider place=locality, a very useful tag. > Clearly such nodes refer to areas, often large and substantial areas, > yet to represent them as areas might often be very difficult as, > depending on the nature of the feature, they don't necessarily have > edges or firm boundaries you can map with an area, they often tend to be > fuzzy concepts. Fordham Moor in Cambridgeshire was one such I came > across recently (it's not a moor in the conventional sense BTW): > http://osm.org/go/0EQ0am7Q-- I see where you're going with this (and with the church example) and I agree up as far as you've taken it. The difference IMHO is that these are two cases where you would draw a polygon if only you knew the correct extent. Whereas I'm not convinced that you would want to give each separate shop in a mall its own private landuse=retail area. I would instead apply a single landuse=retail polygon around the entire mall complex (including access roads and parking) and tag individual buildings as shops and buildings. The shops, of course, _can_ (according to Map Features facism) be validly represented as nodes. Dermot -- -- Iren sind menschlich ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
On 20/08/2009 15:30, David Earl wrote: > On 20/08/2009 15:27, Peter Körner wrote: >>> IN such circumstances I use building=... or landuse=retail to outline >>> the combined structure or area, and then use landuse=retail NODES >>> within them to label each unit >> >> How can a node be of any "landuse" - it's no land, just a >> 0-dimensional point.. > > You're reading too much into the word, as so often happens with tags IMO. > > Very often nodes are used as place-holders for more complete data later. > Churches, for example, are often large structures but most are > represented by nodes. Oh, and one more thing: consider place=locality, a very useful tag. Clearly such nodes refer to areas, often large and substantial areas, yet to represent them as areas might often be very difficult as, depending on the nature of the feature, they don't necessarily have edges or firm boundaries you can map with an area, they often tend to be fuzzy concepts. Fordham Moor in Cambridgeshire was one such I came across recently (it's not a moor in the conventional sense BTW): http://osm.org/go/0EQ0am7Q-- David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
On 20/08/2009 15:27, Peter Körner wrote: >> IN such circumstances I use building=... or landuse=retail to outline >> the combined structure or area, and then use landuse=retail NODES >> within them to label each unit > > How can a node be of any "landuse" - it's no land, just a 0-dimensional > point.. You're reading too much into the word, as so often happens with tags IMO. Very often nodes are used as place-holders for more complete data later. Churches, for example, are often large structures but most are represented by nodes. As for Map features, so what? In the absence of any formal spec for OSM and a vehement camp that strongly believes there shouldn't be a spec, the renderers are king. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
> IN such circumstances I use building=... or landuse=retail to outline > the combined structure or area, and then use landuse=retail NODES within > them to label each unit How can a node be of any "landuse" - it's no land, just a 0-dimensional point.. Peter ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
2009/8/20 David Earl : > IN such circumstances I use building=... or landuse=retail to outline > the combined structure or area, and then use landuse=retail NODES within > them to label each unit (I don't do it for everything, usually just the > larger ones, but that's me being lazy rather than any particular principle). The thing is, Map Features doesn't acknowledge landuse as being valid on nodes. Obviously we're free to extend tagging schemes as we see fit, but the very name "landuse" seems to me ill-suited to a node item. Dermot -- -- Iren sind menschlich ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
> The building tag could be a multiple value tag like building, so: > business=yes or > business=printer or > business=pr_consultant or > business=logistics or > business=medical_devices or > ... If it's a building use building=yes if it's a business-building use building=business if you know what business it is, add business=* see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Building Peter ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
Hi, 2009/8/20 Andrew Ayre : > Thanks. It's not tagging for the renderer, it's using the renderer to > give me a hint that I might be doing things wrong. > > However, if business names don't appear on the online maps which most > people will use, I'm not sure how good an investment of my time it is to > go around photographing buildings and adding the names. In other words it's tagging for the renderer ;) > I want what I > do to benefit the most people. This is understandable, but right now people rarely benefit from OSM data at all other than making statistics. When it becomes more complete and more popular everyone will have forgotten the current mapnik style and there will be renders and other uses we're not imagining now. I guess when I map stuff there's a virtual user somewhere in my head that tries to make use of my data and right now his main use case is searching for stuff with all possible keywords (imagine what kind of queries people type into google) and he wants to know the coordinates and/or conact info. He's also a programmer and sometimes he wants to run some statistics or build a self navigating robot. Cheers ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
On 20/08/2009 04:03, Andrew Ayre wrote: > Roy Wallace wrote: >>> If I draw the outline of a strip mall (a connected string of shops) this >>> represents several businesses together. If I then put nodes on them and >>> give the nodes names Mapnik won't render the names unless they are >>> amenities. But not all businesses are amenities. ... > However, if business names don't appear on the online maps which most > people will use, I'm not sure how good an investment of my time it is to > go around photographing buildings and adding the names. I want what I > do to benefit the most people. IN such circumstances I use building=... or landuse=retail to outline the combined structure or area, and then use landuse=retail NODES within them to label each unit (I don't do it for everything, usually just the larger ones, but that's me being lazy rather than any particular principle). The thing is, the Mapnik rendering does indeed render these (ditto landuse=industrial to pick out individual industrial units in an estate). Examples: http://osm.org/go/0ESQxVuz I think building=...+name=... is also rendered for building tags on nodes, though that's less appropriate in these circumstances. Useful though when you can't get or reasonably estimate the outline, but it's obviously second best. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
James Livingston wrote: On 20/08/2009, at 10:29 AM, Andrew Ayre wrote: If I draw the outline of a strip mall (a connected string of shops) this represents several businesses together. If I then put nodes on them and give the nodes names Mapnik won't render the names unless they are amenities. But not all businesses are amenities. I'd say that you need to tag them as what they are. If they're shops, then use shop=*, and if it's a company's office then we need to have a tag for that and add it to the renderers. I think there might be a need for a business tag. Amenities and shops are places Joe Public would visit, but in business parks and industrial estates most buildings would not meet these criteria so might only get a building tag at best. The building tag could be a multiple value tag like building, so: business=yes or business=printer or business=pr_consultant or business=logistics or business=medical_devices or ... Choose business=yes and add a name tag if thats all you know, but add business=whatever if you know more. The extra tags like telephone numbers, website etc would give more details. This might (eventually) give the basis for a business directory. Renderers would render business=* generally with the name and some business types might get an icon too. Is it worth pursuing? Cheers, Chris ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
On 20/08/2009, at 10:29 AM, Andrew Ayre wrote: > If I draw the outline of a strip mall (a connected string of shops) > this > represents several businesses together. If I then put nodes on them > and > give the nodes names Mapnik won't render the names unless they are > amenities. But not all businesses are amenities. I'd say that you need to tag them as what they are. If they're shops, then use shop=*, and if it's a company's office then we need to have a tag for that and add it to the renderers. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Andrew Ayre wrote: > > Thanks. It's not tagging for the renderer, it's using the renderer to give > me a hint that I might be doing things wrong. Fair enough. But generally, I find it's not very useful for that purpose. Searching the wiki and/or asking the list like you have is the way to go. > However, if business names don't appear on the online maps which most people > will use, I'm not sure how good an investment of my time it is to go around > photographing buildings and adding the names. I want what I do to benefit > the most people. Do what you think will be useful *once the renderers have caught up*. If it is indeed useful, the renderers will eventually catch up. Also, don't forget that the data is (and may be) used in many more ways other than rendering an online map (e.g. in your case of business names, this is necessary to be able to search for a business location by name). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
Roy Wallace wrote: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Andrew Ayre wrote: >> If I draw an outline for a freestanding building which is some kind of >> business, then I give the outline a name. Mapnik renders the name. >> >> If I draw the outline of a strip mall (a connected string of shops) this >> represents several businesses together. If I then put nodes on them and >> give the nodes names Mapnik won't render the names unless they are >> amenities. But not all businesses are amenities. >> >> So when handling strip malls should the outline of each business "unit" >> be drawn separately? Or should I just ignore the fact that the names of >> many businesses won't appear on the map? > > IMHO, you should map whatever is on the ground. > > Mapping the outline of business "units" is not a bad idea - perhaps > you should check out the following proposal: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Buildings > > As for "ignoring the fact that the names of many businesses won't > appear on the map", yes, you should ignore this - don't tag for the > renderer. Thanks. It's not tagging for the renderer, it's using the renderer to give me a hint that I might be doing things wrong. However, if business names don't appear on the online maps which most people will use, I'm not sure how good an investment of my time it is to go around photographing buildings and adding the names. I want what I do to benefit the most people. Andy -- Andy PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Andrew Ayre wrote: > If I draw an outline for a freestanding building which is some kind of > business, then I give the outline a name. Mapnik renders the name. > > If I draw the outline of a strip mall (a connected string of shops) this > represents several businesses together. If I then put nodes on them and > give the nodes names Mapnik won't render the names unless they are > amenities. But not all businesses are amenities. > > So when handling strip malls should the outline of each business "unit" > be drawn separately? Or should I just ignore the fact that the names of > many businesses won't appear on the map? IMHO, you should map whatever is on the ground. Mapping the outline of business "units" is not a bad idea - perhaps you should check out the following proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Buildings As for "ignoring the fact that the names of many businesses won't appear on the map", yes, you should ignore this - don't tag for the renderer. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Business Building Conventions
If I draw an outline for a freestanding building which is some kind of business, then I give the outline a name. Mapnik renders the name. If I draw the outline of a strip mall (a connected string of shops) this represents several businesses together. If I then put nodes on them and give the nodes names Mapnik won't render the names unless they are amenities. But not all businesses are amenities. So when handling strip malls should the outline of each business "unit" be drawn separately? Or should I just ignore the fact that the names of many businesses won't appear on the map? thanks, Andy -- Andy PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
