I agree with Marc that you should never "create nodes at a random position with the equipment to avoid the tag for the characteristic". If you place a node, it should reflect as closely as possible the actual position, although if the position is uncertain, it's typical in OSM to place a node rather than an area (closed way). If it's just a sheer guess, however, the node should be avoided. And if there are "a lot of these things here", then that argues even more strongly for making it a characteristic of the enclosing area, rather than a node. Think of hotel rooms -- rather than mapping each room (as an area or, shudder, a node), you simply tag the hotel with "rooms=35".
As to the example of a bus shelter with a bench, I personally favor making it a characteristic of the shelter (as Marc suggests), rather than placing a separate node, because the bench would not exist except for the shelter. If there is a bench NEAR the shelter, but outside of it, I would make that a separate node. But that is my personal preference, I occasionally encounter shelters mapped as areas with nodes for benches inside. It's not my style, but on the other hand I don't change it if someone else has done it. I do add the "bench=yes" tag, however, to the shelter itself, as that's useful for people searching for shelters-with-benches. In general, I try to think of a typical end-user case. What will make OSM most helpful for the person who wants to use it? (not: what will make things easiest for the mapper?) John On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 4:46 PM François Lacombe <fl.infosrese...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you two for the elaborated answers > > I agree that currently many mapping practices split sites and devices. > Then the idea should spread as to not get in arguments like the one in the > proposal. > > Nevertheless I have comments regarding Marc examples : > * " bin/shelter/bench=yes on a bus stop for this equipment is present > in the area of the bus stop" > Shouldn't we put a node inside the bus-stop shelter area to materialize > the bin or the bench? > * lit=yes on an highway feature properly indicates kind of "process" > without be redundant with individual street lights lighting the road > This is exactly with I propose for traction substations, mapping process > on sites and devices independently. > > Things are better than I thought. > Then, it would be good to amend the 1 feature=1 osm object page with more > clear messages (and examples) > All of this discussion only cover sites mapped as areas. We can start by > stating that a particular device on the ground should get its own object > instead of being moved to enclosing building/site/place ? > This is not possible to distinguish sites from devices at the moment they > are located on a single node. > > All the best > > François > > Le sam. 8 juin 2019 à 01:06, marc marc <marc_marc_...@hotmail.com> a > écrit : > >> Hello, >> >> Le 07.06.19 à 19:08, François Lacombe a écrit : >> > a need to distinguish sites and devices in our tagging. >> >> making a difference between a characteristic of a site and the device >> providing that characteristic is already what we do for many objects. >> below are some examples. >> I find it quite logical and useful to inform therefore that a site >> has a feature with another tag than the device of this feature. >> in that sense I find your proposal quite coherent. >> I completely disagree with the idea of a comment on the proposal >> to create nodes at a random position with the equipment to avoid >> the tag for the characteristic. of course, >> it's better to be able to map each device separately, but not >> by inventing their position and number just to need one less tag >> >> some exemples : >> bin/shelter/bench=yes on a bus stop for this equipment is present >> in the area of the bus stop >> bar=yes on a POI to say that there is a bar in the area of the POI >> lit=yes on a road to say that there are lighting devices nearby. >> tactile_paving on the node of a pedestrian crossing to indicate >> that there is a tactile_paving at the intersection of the pedestrian >> path and the kerb >> toilets and toilets:wheelchair on a POI >> >> Regards, >> Marc >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
