sent from a phone
> On 24. Jul 2018, at 09:36, Andrew Hain <andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > > -1, there are several established tags for residential buildings in osm, e.g. > apartments, > > The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many of them. We > have many tags for residential buildings > and the result is that they're used inconsistently. I am not seeing this, I can see many levels of detail, from “yes” via “residential” to “house”, “detached” and finally specific local types like “trullo”. It is not inconsistent (in a harmful way) to map with different level of detail/specificity, it is rather normal for a project with many contributors with different personal interests and fields of knowledge. It would be a problem if the inconsistency were industrial production buildings mapped as residential buildings (for example). We should not remove the details, and nuances in this field, data consumers can deal with it, they will either treat all/most buildings the same (so it doesn’t matter to them anyway), or they could be specifically interested in generalized types they can now define as they need, or they are really interested in different dwelling typologies and their spatial distribution, and are happy with what they find in some places in osm. What would IMHO make more sense are lists or better structured trees that show the system / hierarchy of the building values that are in use. The current flat list does not do a very good job in explaining the system nor for finding specific tags. Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
