I'm not sure Reading is good, it's just a different approach. Buildings (and indeed most areas) are typically rendered below lines, for various practical reasons. So maybe it is better to think of building as the ground-coverage, rather than the usable floor (or roof).
You might want to put covered=yes on the lines as they pass underneath (this is what is done for covered walkways between buildings, for instance). But anything is likely to be a compromise. Look at other stations and see what seems to work best. Richard On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Stuart Reynolds < stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk> wrote: > Personally I think that Reading is cheating. > > The outline that is called the railway station “building” includes the > ticket halls, the bridge, and the platform surfaces to the extent that > these stick out of the bridge area. I don’t agree with this - the last time > I looked, a platform wasn’t a building; it is a platform. I would expect > this to be a site relation - and in fact, Euston appears to be mapped that > way, so it doesn’t look like I’m a million miles out with that thought. > > Next, the individual “platforms" have been mapped as edges alongside the > satellite-visible parts of the platform areas. The platforms in OSM don’t > extend under the footbridge - when in reality they do. Again, at Euston the > platforms are areas (split in half to allow tagging of each platform > number). Yes the bridge at Reading is marked as a bridge, which it allows > it to go over the tracks. But it really is a bridge at Reading. At Gatwick > it is a whole building over the tracks. > > So, to me, Reading looks like it has been mapped for the renderer, rather > than representing what is physically on the ground. > > Regards > Stuart > > > ------------------------------------ > Stuart Reynolds > for traveline south east & anglia > > > > On 21 Jan 2016, at 10:34, Richard Mann <richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Compare Reading - are you mapping a roof or a groundplan, or a pedestrian > bridge? > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Stuart Reynolds < > stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I made a number of adjustments around the transport terminus at Gatwick >> Airport South Terminal yesterday. When this was first mapped, what is >> actually three buildings (the railway station, the covered travelators from >> the bus station & car parks, and the southern stairs from the railway >> platforms) were all mapped as one building, and the platforms were >> “inserts” into the gaps rather than being the continuous entities that they >> are. So I have separated those all out, and made the platforms a continuous >> block. I also added internal escalators and travelators, although that is >> immaterial to the question that I’m about to ask. >> >> The buildings are all mapped as layer=1, and the platforms without any >> layer tag (which should default them to layer=0, AFAIK). So why are the >> platforms and rail tracks (which I haven’t touched) been rendered over the >> buildings, rather than under them? >> >> See http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/51.15634/-0.16124 >> >> Thanks >> Stuart >> >> >> ------------------------------------ >> Stuart Reynolds >> for traveline south east & anglia >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-GB mailing list >> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >> >> > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
