@Dave F
Here is an example of where idependent buildings have been built as
connected in OSM (https://osm.org/go/zrViz5k4A--?layers=D=). Here is an
area where we have a great difficulty tracing using satellite imagery alone
and where mapping historically has not been clear regarding this rule (
2017-10-25 16:40 GMT+03:00 Stefan Keller wrote:
> 1. My ceterum-censeo is, that we really need a polygon type in OSM.
> This would make mapping, and many written and unwritten(!) rules much
> easier (not to forget software).
What exactly are we missing on this polygon topic?
Because
sent from a phone
> On 26. Oct 2017, at 23:48, Daniel Koć wrote:
>
> If you mean standard tile layer (osm-carto), landcover=* tag is far from
> being accepted:
>
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/2548#issuecomment-330002296
most prominent
W dniu 26.10.2017 o 23:36, Warin pisze:
While natural=wood renders, I also tag them as landcover=trees as that
is more truthful of what is there.
So these tree areas get two tags from me until such time as landcover
is rendered then I will remove the natural tag.
If you mean standard tile
On 27-Oct-17 12:00 AM, Joseph Reeves wrote:
A problem i find is with landuse=forest. Formally, those are zones
that are used for growing trees. But practically in OSM, that tag
is used for any land that is covered with trees. So formally,
landuse=forest shouldn't overlap with
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:50:40PM +0300, Tomas Straupis wrote:
> Hello
>
> For a long time I wanted to hear opinion on the topic of topology rules.
>
> By "topology rules" here I mean just simple rules such as:
> * polygon X should not overlap polygon Y
> * polygon X should always be
A problem i find is with landuse=forest. Formally, those are zones that are
used for growing trees. But practically in OSM, that tag is used for any
land that is covered with trees. So formally, landuse=forest shouldn't
overlap with other zones, but practically, until a new tag
(landcover=trees)
I like the idea of formalizing OSM topology!
An example: power lines should share nodes with nothing except power
towers, portals and buildings (substation buildings).
A problem i find is with landuse=forest. Formally, those are zones that are
used for growing trees. But practically in OSM, that
sent from a phone
> On 25. Oct 2017, at 17:36, Gaurav Thapa wrote:
>
> In Nepal we have been trying to make sure that each constructed building has
> its own footprint and is not connected to a neighbouring structure via a
> shared wall. We do this as in reality this
Could you link to an example?
DaveF
On 25/10/2017 16:36, Gaurav Thapa wrote:
"2. Buildings.
If 2 buildings share a wall or are constructed one aside the other
(double wall), you should have them connected in OSM as well."
In Nepal we have been trying to make sure that each constructed
"2. Buildings.
If 2 buildings share a wall or are constructed one aside the other (double
wall), you should have them connected in OSM as well."
In Nepal we have been trying to make sure that each constructed building
has its own footprint and is not connected to a neighbouring structure via
a
sent from a phone
> On 25. Oct 2017, at 15:40, Stefan Keller wrote:
>
> want to point to network topology
> which is important for navigation.
+1, also: which objects should be connected to highways or not (e.g. platforms,
piers, parkings, runways, ...)
cheers,
Martin
Hi Tomas
Two comments on this:
1. My ceterum-censeo is, that we really need a polygon type in OSM.
This would make mapping, and many written and unwritten(!) rules much
easier (not to forget software).
2. I'd like to support Martin and want to point to network topology
which is important for
2017-10-25 14:03 GMT+03:00 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> For a long time I wanted to hear opinion on the topic of topology rules.
> most important is IMHO: when do you share nodes, and when not.
> <...>
Thank you for notes about the rules, I will think about it at least
for local rules.
2017-10-25 11:50 GMT+02:00 Tomas Straupis :
> Hello
>
> For a long time I wanted to hear opinion on the topic of topology rules.
>
> By "topology rules" here I mean just simple rules such as:
> * polygon X should not overlap polygon Y
> * polygon X should always
Hello
For a long time I wanted to hear opinion on the topic of topology rules.
By "topology rules" here I mean just simple rules such as:
* polygon X should not overlap polygon Y
* polygon X should always be above polygon Y
* point X should be not further from line Y than D
etc.
16 matches
Mail list logo