We're over the 40 k limit again so I trimmed it. I get the impression that just adding the building outline or even an approximation of a building outline adds value to the map.
My own house has a cantilever on the back so the upper story extends beyond the basement outline. It also has a porch on the front which has a basement. My personal view is a rectangle that represents the basic shape is more than acceptable however I can appreciate that some might like to have a greater level of detail. I personally feel this can be added later. Cheerio John On Thu, Jan 24, 2019, 12:03 PM James <james2...@gmail.com wrote: > That is incorrect, some building parts could be bigger if they are > surrounding the building as an overhang etc. You can't assume building will > be bigger > > On Thu., Jan. 24, 2019, 11:51 a.m. Nate Wessel <bike...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Is it sufficient to tag fragments as building:part without indicating >> which part or how many stories? If the data is properly structured, this >> seems like something that could be handled in preprocessing by checking for >> overlapping polygons. It looks like perhaps we might just have to find the >> largest part for the footprint (building=yes) and any intersecting smaller >> buildings (building:part=yes). >> >> We might also need to generate some building relations for more complex >> features. >> Nate Wessel >> Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning >> NateWessel.com <http://natewessel.com> >> >> On 1/24/19 11:40 AM, Yaro Shkvorets wrote: >> >> OSM wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:part >> It's not in the import wiki though since whoever wrote it didn't know >> about it at the time. >> Here's what I mean by mapping 3D features in our case. Say there is a >> residential tower on a podium. In the StatsCan data usually you would find >> both of these outlines - large podium outline and smaller tower outline >> inside it. They would both be tagged with "building=yes" tag. Obviously we >> can't upload that as-is. We can either just remove tower outline leaving >> only 2D podium outline. Or, we can tag the tower outline with >> "building:part=yes". Someone local can add other tags to it later on, such >> as "building:levels", "building:material", "building:min_level", >> "addr:housenumber" (if there are two towers on one podium with different >> house numbers for example), etc. I find the latter approach to be the right >> one. >> >> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 11:15 AM Nate Wessel <bike...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Yaro, >>> >>> I just had a chance to look at the documentation on the source data and >>> I wasn't able to find anything about 3D features or parts of buildings >>> being mapped separately. Are you guessing here, or is there documentation >>> on this? If so can you point us to it? >>> >>> In any case, the big shapefiles from StatsCan don't provide enough >>> information to reconstruct any 3D geometries, so I'd be inclined to remove >>> these from the import unless they can be brought in from another source >>> with better documentation / attribute tagging. (i.e. City of Toronto?) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Nate Wessel >>> Jack of all trades, Master of Geography, PhD candidate in Urban Planning >>> NateWessel.com <http://natewessel.com> >>> >>> On 1/18/19 2:48 PM, Yaro Shkvorets wrote: >>> >>> Jarek, >>> There is no question we want this data. I went through much of it in >>> Toronto and Kingston and I found it to be very good, consistent and >>> precise. Time-wise it's somewhat current with 2016 ESRI imagery (sometimes >>> ahead, sometimes slightly behind) and is well-aligned with it. It offers 3D >>> features (when several buildings appear overlapped in the dataset) but you >>> just need to be familiar with `building:part` tag to sort through it. I >>> haven't looked at other provinces but in Ontario I really have no >>> complaints about dataset quality whatsoever. Also I don't get Nate's >>> "wildly unsimplified geometries" comment. IMO geometries are just perfectly >>> detailed. >>> >>> >>>
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
