Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Jan Michel]

Hi,
I don't think we need another tag here, but we have to define one common 
way to tag these.

There are several different keys already in use:

addr:postbox   (214)
addr:pobox (185)
contact:pobox  (114)
contact:p.o.box (84)
addr:po_box (16)

I'm personally in favor of contact:pobox - it's not an address, but a 
way of contact.
I'd disfavor any spelling of 'post box' in this context, because this 
term is already used in OSM to mark boxes letters are delivered to and 
might cause some confusion.


Jan


On 19.03.20 00:24, Warin wrote:

Hi,

While there are methods of entering street addresses there don't appear 
to be any way to enter addresses that use Post Office Boxes and other 
delivery types.


There is a proposal to may the existence of PO Boxes but no way to enter the 
address data for those that use them.

As well as PO Boxes there exits several types of delivery methods in Australia, 
below are listed all of the officially accepted types with their officially 
accepted abbreviations.




___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Fr., 20. März 2020 um 11:40 Uhr schrieb Jan Michel :
>
> I'm personally in favor of contact:pobox - it's not an address, but a
> way of contact.




but isn't this referring to post office boxes, as opposed to the other kind
of lockers and boxes that the OP mentioned? Are you suggesting to use this
for all kind of such boxes (and maybe add an additional tag for the kind of
box) or shall we have contact:* for all those:

Care of Post Office  CARE PO
Community Mail Agent.  CMA
Community Mail Bag  CMB
Community Postal Agent  CPA
General Post Office Box  GPO BOX
Locked Bag  LOCKED BAG
Mail Service  MS
Post Office Box  PO BOX
Roadside Delivery  RSD
Roadside Mail Box/Bag  RMB
Roadside Mail Service  RMS
Private Bag  PRIVATE BAG



Cheers
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 05:19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Maybe yet another tag mail_address=* ???  (I can hear the hair pulling
> from here, thanks.)
>

I'll try to grow some so I can pull it out.

What is the key addr for?
>
> For physical addresses only?
>
> If not, what else OR ?
>

Traditional paper maps could, at best, show only physical addresses.
You'd see the name of the nearest street and the house would have
a number.  Sometimes the address you assumed from that info
would be wrong, because the address reflects older road
layouts and is anomalous when looking at the modern
layout (I have a few of those in my town, where the actual
address is not what you'd think).  Even the largest scale
paper maps didn't identify businesses (except you might
occasionally see something like "Depot" but without a
clue as to what sort of depot).

But we've moved on.  We expect our maps to identify shops.  Not
just by name but by type, often showing the specific product
categories.  We often tag opening hours of shops, perhaps
a URL to a web page/site, ID of hygiene certificate, etc.
None of these things are available on traditional paper
maps but we add them because they're useful (and,
perhaps, in some cases because it's what Google
Maps does and we'd like to be seen as an alternative
to them, but Google Maps added them because they
were useful).

So is PO box, etc. useful?  Yep.  One of the parcel
delivery companies noted for delivering to the wrong
address (Hermes and DHL, I'm looking at you) has
dumped a package outside my door.  The address is
PO Box 123.  Which of the houses near me has that
mailing address?

I've just realized I cannot grow hair on demand.  How about
addr:mail or addr:delivery?

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Jan Michel]

On 20.03.20 11:44, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
but isn't this referring to post office boxes, as opposed to the other 
kind of lockers and boxes that the OP mentioned? Are you suggesting to 
use this for all kind of such boxes 
Yes. We shouldn't have a separate tag for each and every company that 
offers such services. The value of the tag should be what needs to be on 
the address label and this has to contain information on the kind of box 
or the operator.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v3

[Dave F via Tagging]

On 11/03/2020 12:12, Jo wrote:

That stop_position nodes became optional is probably because of my
influence.


Sorry. but 



  In the beginning they were definitely part of how PTv2.


railway=stop was, I believe, around before PTv2 concept.


I disliked this very much because all of a sudden we were using 2 objects to
define a single stop, duplicating details, which seemed like a very bad
idea. And it was.


You're misunderstanding stop/stop_position which is used to indicate 
where individual services stop. There can be multiple 'stops' per 
'railway station'.




About the stops, I would have all the details on a single node,
highway=bus_stop, railway=tram_stop next to the road where the passengers
wait.


Bus/Tram stops should have the equivalent set up as railway stations - 
One node to represent the whole station ie railway=station & numerous 
nodes to represent every place a train stops ie railway=stop.

It would require creating new tags for bus/tram stops.


DaveF

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Tobias Wrede]

Hi,

Am 20.03.2020 um 12:30 schrieb Paul Allen:


One of the parcel
delivery companies noted for delivering to the wrong
address (Hermes and DHL, I'm looking at you) has
dumped a package outside my door.  The address is
PO Box 123.  Which of the houses near me has that
mailing address?

I don't get your point here. Either someone wanted a package delivered 
to his residence. In that case they gave the wrong address information 
to the delivery guys. Should have given them a street/number or whatever 
is needed in your area to find the place. Or they wanted to have the 
package delivered to their PO Box, then the address information needs to 
be tagged to the post office where the PO Box is located and they need 
to chose a delivery company able to deliver to PO boxes.


(sorry for reordering)


So is PO box, etc. useful?  Yep.


I personally cannot really see a usecase. But as long as we tag phone 
numbers, websites, fax numbers etc. I cannot see why we should 
discourage it, either.


Tobias


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v3

[Dave F via Tagging]

On 11/03/2020 12:07, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

I notice that they also refer to adding bus=yes etc to platforms

representing bus stops, which was not part of the PTv2 proposal, but I guess
tries to deal with one of the issues that led people to prefer
highway=bus_stop.

Yes, that is a rather silly thing that has been added, since it was
noticed after the proposal that if you removed highway=bus_stop and
only had public_transport=platform, then you would have no way to know
it was a bus stop rather than a train platform.

So now some mappers advocate adding a second tag bus=yes, originally
only proposed for stop positions. But if the originally, more common
tag highway=bus_stop is already used, there is no need to add bus=yes.


This shows, once again, how PTv2 just induces confusion & so leads to 
errors in the OSM database.


PTv2 was, naively, designed as a replacement for existing transit tags. 
They were not designed to be used in conjunction with each other. so 
Joseph's last sentence is irrelevant & incorrect.


PTv2 was a cock-up & needs to be rescinded.

DaveF



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v3

[Dave F via Tagging]

On 11/03/2020 12:16, Jo wrote:


But if the originally, more common
tag highway=bus_stop is already used, there is no need to add bus=yes.



OK, but if we have to keep  highway=bus_stop anyway, then one could also
say that it's not needed to add public_transport=platform to such nodes
anymore.


True. There is no requirement for public_transport tags. PTv2 adds 
nothing new.





And if we do that, then those nodes don't really need roles in the route
relations either,

The problem with PTv2 is that it was an attempt to streamline how buses
were mapped based on how railway was mapped,


Even if all existing transit (PTv1) tags were removed PTv2 wouldn't be 
'streamlined' as it reuires at least twice the number of tags to 
represent the same processes.


DaveF

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v3

[Janko Mihelić]

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 15:21 Dave F via Tagging 
wrote:

> True. There is no requirement for public_transport tags. PTv2 adds
> nothing new.


Maybe for tags, but relations with the order of platforms and ways was new
if I recall correctly, and we should still use that (well, the platforms,
maybe not ways). I remember the early relations with the "forward" and
"backwards" roles which would break each time someone reversed a way.

Janko
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 13:50, Tobias Wrede  wrote:

> Am 20.03.2020 um 12:30 schrieb Paul Allen:
>
> One of the parcel
> delivery companies noted for delivering to the wrong
> address (Hermes and DHL, I'm looking at you) has
> dumped a package outside my door.  The address is
> PO Box 123.  Which of the houses near me has that
> mailing address?
>
> I don't get your point here. Either someone wanted a package delivered to
> his residence. In that case they gave the wrong address information to the
> delivery guys.
>
Around here, the delivery guys get it wrong even when they have the full
address and no PO boxes involved.  The problem comes when the package
is addressed to the PO box and then the delivery guys do the "last mile"
getting it from the PO Box to the physical location, and get that wrong.

I now have a package with a PO Box address and I wonder if it's for one
of my neighbours.  If I can identify the physical location I can save myself
the hassle of waiting all day for a collection, only to find they decided
they'd turn up tomorrow, instead (that happens too).

> Should have given them a street/number or whatever is needed in your area
> to find the place. Or they wanted to have the package delivered to their PO
> Box, then the address information needs to be tagged to the post office
> where the PO Box is located and they need to chose a delivery company able
> to deliver to PO boxes.
>

See above.  Hermes, in particular, are crap.  Deliver days after they were
meant
to.  Deliver to the wrong address.  Etc.  One area has gone through several
different Hermes deliverers in the past year, only one of them was competent
but Hermes was late paying him (maybe they wanted to force him to quit
because he was ruining their reputation).

> I personally cannot really see a usecase.
>
I can see usecases, but they're a bit contrived and would be very rare.
Like wanting your lawyer to write a cease-and-desist letter to the noisy
neighbour who doesn't have an address other than a PO Box.


> But as long as we tag phone numbers, websites, fax numbers etc. I cannot
> see why we should discourage it, either.
>
If we're just mapping things that a paper map shows, we wouldn't map
post/zip
codes either.  In some cases this other information, even PO Box, is useful,
so people WILL map it.  It's better we come up with a way of doing it than
have all those people come up with their own way.

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Public Transport v3

[Dave F via Tagging]

On 20/03/2020 15:26, Janko Mihelić wrote:

the order of platforms and ways


I'm unsure what you mean. Could you expand please? Is there a wiki page?

DaveF


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:55, Jan Michel  wrote:

> Yes. We shouldn't have a separate tag for each and every company that
> offers such services.


No, that get's very unwieldy, very quickly, especially when you get several
different ways of spelling the same thing, as just demonstrated with PO
boxes.

The value of the tag should be what needs to be on
> the address label and this has to contain information on the kind of box
> or the operator.
>

Yep, in whichever format it appears

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:32, Paul Allen  wrote:

> How about
> addr:mail or addr:delivery?
>

I'd suggest addr:mail= whatever you want to list out of all of Warin's
options (+ undoubtedly more)!

  Thanks

Graeme
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Updating definition and description of place=square

[Joseph Eisenberg]

A few of us have been updating the Tag:place=square page, and Square:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dsquare

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Square

Originally a place=square was just defined as "A square", with a list
of translations like "place, plaza, platz, piazza" etc.

However, many features which include on of these words in their name
are actually a park or a street junction or even a neighborhoood.

Hopefully the new definition makes it more clear what this tag was
intended for: as a way to map a named square, rather than putting the
name=* tag on the highway=pedestrian + area=yes feature.

(It is still quite common for the names of squares to be added
directly to the highway area (the actual paved surface where
pedestrians can walk in all directions), but it is probably true that
this is not quite correct.)

Unfortunately, this tag has been used rather inconsistently around the
world, often for any feature that includes the word "square" or a
translation of that word, or which might be considered similar in the
local language.

Some poorly mapped examples are shown on github:

*https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593045858
* 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046473
* 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4043#issuecomment-593046673

Check if any of the place=square features in your area should instead
be junction=yes (for a named street intersection or road junction) or
leisure=park or place=neighborhood.

Also check if there are highway=pedestrian areas with a name=* which
could better have the name added to a new place=square node instead.

-- Joseph Eisenberg

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Warin]

On 21/3/20 9:00 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:




On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:55, Jan Michel > wrote:


Yes. We shouldn't have a separate tag for each and every company that
offers such services. 



No, that get's very unwieldy, very quickly, especially when you get 
several different ways of spelling the same thing, as just 
demonstrated with PO boxes.



Here Post offices are the only ones that 'deliver' to PO Boxes. Very few 
outside contractors interface with the Post Office to enable PO Box 
delivery. Similar comments for RMBs etc. I think similar comments 
applies to other PO Boxes around the world?


For remote places again few contractors would be delivering to a 
specific place, they usually contact the place and have them come and 
pick up from their 'local' depot.


That trip can be a few hours there and a few hours back. For this reason 
most remote places prefer the official Post Office delivery system as it 
gets the mail closer to them.



As for different ways of spelling/formatting. Mistakes will occur just 
as they do in naming streets with 'Rd' or 'rd' rather than Road. In any 
country where there is an officially desired spelling/format then that 
can be referenced and values corrected to it.



For 'other' delivery providers they may prefer to use the other addr keys?


I refer to the 'address' of t|he Barkly Homestead;
|
"PRIVATE MAIL BAG 32
Tennant Creek
Northern Territory  0862

Australia"


At present within OSM there is no contact nor address information there.

https://www.barklyhomestead.com.au/

For other deliveries?

" 19.7107° S, 135.8275° E

Situated on the Barkly Highway

between Tennant Creek - NT and Camooweal - QLD"

Note - no house number, lot number etc... locals and those traveling 
through will simply 'know' of its location.




The value of the tag should be what needs to be on
the address label and this has to contain information on the kind
of box
or the operator.


Yep, in whichever format it appears


The format may change from country to country. I listed what is 
officially accepted by the Post Office here.


OSM will need to accept that formats will change, as may the language.

I am occasionally questioned when sending things overseas as to the 
address, it being particularly long.


My relatives assure me that it is correct and needed to ensure correct 
delivery.




On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:32, Paul Allen > wrote:


How about
addr:mail or addr:delivery?


I'd suggest addr:mail= whatever you want to list out of all of Warin's 
options (+ undoubtedly more)!




Whatever key is used there will need to be some sort of format of the 
value to identify CRLF, particularly if the key is to carry the entire 
address (country, postcode, state, town/city/ etc) in the format wanted 
by the delivering organization. I am assuming that the complete address 
will need to be placed here as it may vary from what is entered in the 
other addr tags.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Addresses with PO Box, and other delivery type addresses.

[Joseph Eisenberg]

I agree with "addr:mail=*" as a tag to add to guesthouses, shops,
farms and other businesses, as a way to send letters and perhaps small
parcels, which might be delivered to a PO Box or some rural delivery
system, rather than to the physical address of the shop, business or
other public feature.

But I would caution against adding this to private house features, due
to privacy laws in some countries.

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On 3/21/20, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 21/3/20 9:00 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:55, Jan Michel > > wrote:
>>
>> Yes. We shouldn't have a separate tag for each and every company that
>> offers such services.
>>
>>
>> No, that get's very unwieldy, very quickly, especially when you get
>> several different ways of spelling the same thing, as just
>> demonstrated with PO boxes.
>
>
> Here Post offices are the only ones that 'deliver' to PO Boxes. Very few
> outside contractors interface with the Post Office to enable PO Box
> delivery. Similar comments for RMBs etc. I think similar comments
> applies to other PO Boxes around the world?
>
> For remote places again few contractors would be delivering to a
> specific place, they usually contact the place and have them come and
> pick up from their 'local' depot.
>
> That trip can be a few hours there and a few hours back. For this reason
> most remote places prefer the official Post Office delivery system as it
> gets the mail closer to them.
>
>
> As for different ways of spelling/formatting. Mistakes will occur just
> as they do in naming streets with 'Rd' or 'rd' rather than Road. In any
> country where there is an officially desired spelling/format then that
> can be referenced and values corrected to it.
>
>
> For 'other' delivery providers they may prefer to use the other addr keys?
>
>
> I refer to the 'address' of t|he Barkly Homestead;
> |
> "PRIVATE MAIL BAG 32
> Tennant Creek
> Northern Territory  0862
>
> Australia"
>
>
> At present within OSM there is no contact nor address information there.
>
> https://www.barklyhomestead.com.au/
>
> For other deliveries?
>
> " 19.7107° S, 135.8275° E
>
> Situated on the Barkly Highway
>
> between Tennant Creek - NT and Camooweal - QLD"
>
> Note - no house number, lot number etc... locals and those traveling
> through will simply 'know' of its location.
>
>>
>> The value of the tag should be what needs to be on
>> the address label and this has to contain information on the kind
>> of box
>> or the operator.
>>
>>
>> Yep, in whichever format it appears
>
> The format may change from country to country. I listed what is
> officially accepted by the Post Office here.
>
> OSM will need to accept that formats will change, as may the language.
>
> I am occasionally questioned when sending things overseas as to the
> address, it being particularly long.
>
> My relatives assure me that it is correct and needed to ensure correct
> delivery.
>
>>
>> On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:32, Paul Allen > > wrote:
>>
>> How about
>> addr:mail or addr:delivery?
>>
>>
>> I'd suggest addr:mail= whatever you want to list out of all of Warin's
>> options (+ undoubtedly more)!
>>
>
> Whatever key is used there will need to be some sort of format of the
> value to identify CRLF, particularly if the key is to carry the entire
> address (country, postcode, state, town/city/ etc) in the format wanted
> by the delivering organization. I am assuming that the complete address
> will need to be placed here as it may vary from what is entered in the
> other addr tags.
>
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] General Tags for unmapped cities

[Guillermo Ariel Silva Lopez]

Hello, I am currently working on a project called Atlas Urbano (
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AtlasUrbano) where we seek to upload
more data to mapped building polygons by the MapPYOSM project in different
cities of Paraguay.

The main idea is to be able to generate a first layer of general
information on building uses that is scalable and replicable to all
municipalities. For this, first we want to use more general tags, which can
then be specified, already in a next stage.

In this first layer of information we want to classify buildings into four
general use categories:

residential

commercial

General services

mixed use

The tags that exist, for residential and commercial, and we currently use
are:

building = residential

building = commercial


We also want to map general services for the population, which would be
buildings that house activities intended to provide services. Educational
buildings, health posts, public buildings, cultural centers, NGOs, etc. are
included in this category. We did not find a suitable tag that encompasses
all cases and, as we did not find an alternative, we want to propose using
this tag, which will serve to designate generally urban services and
facilities:

building = general_services


Finally, we want to map buildings that house two or more uses, and this
translates to being buildings that house both residential and commercial
programs, or commercial and general service programs; that is, mixed uses
could encompass any possible combination of the three uses mentioned above.
By not finding a tag that labels this combination of uses, we want to
propose using this tag:

building = mixed_use

I hope you can give me recommendations on the best way to do this.

Regards to all.

Guillermo Silva
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] General Tags for unmapped cities

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Muchas gracias, Sr. Silva

> we seek to upload more data to mapped building polygons by the MapPYOSM 
> project in different cities of Paraguay.

Do you mean that these buildings are already mapped in the
Openstreetmap Database, but as a generic tag like "building=yes"?

Or are you planning to import the shapes of buildings from an external database?

If you are adding the tags due to local knowledge of the mappers,
especially if the mappers survey the buildings, then that is great.

If the data is coming from an external source, please read and follow
the Import Guidelines and the Automated Edits Code of Conduct:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines

You may wish to look at how the key building=* is currently used:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building

Most commonly, the key "building=*" describes how the building looks:
for example, a building that was built as a church, but is now used as
a theatre, is still a "building=church" but then you add
"amenity=theatre" to show that it is used as a theatre.

Residential, commercial and retail areas are mapped with the key
Landuse and include the land around the buildings. In residential
areas, this would include gardens, lawns, garages, parkings spaces,
and so on, tagged landuse=residential. The buildings will be
building=house, building=apartment, building=duplex, building=terrace
and so on.

In Commercial and Retail areas, the landuse area will include parking
lots, service roads, service buildings, outdoor seating areas,
courtyards, and so on, in the landuse=commercial or landuse=retail
areas.

And landuse=industrial includes the industrial facilities as well as
warehouses, man_made=works (factories), service roads, parking lots,
power lines, etc.

There is currently no established tag for mixed-use urban areas, but
most of these are tagged as landuse=retail, since retail is often the
main use of the first floor or level of the buildings in a mixed-use
area. If retail isn't the main use, rather offices plus hotels and
some residential, it is common to use landuse=commercial for
commercial+residential or office+hotel areas.

In addition, mappers are encouraged to map the shops, offices, and
other individual features within each building. A building=office will
often contain one or more office=company, office=ngo, or
office=government features. Retail buildings and landuse will contain
one or more shop=* features

See:
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office

For public services, many things are found under office=government or amenity=*
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aoffice%3Dgovernment
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:amenity

As a general overview, you can see the complete list of common
features at Map Features:
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features

Also see "How we map"
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map

And "how to map landuse" which includes a relatively complete list of
tags related to how lands and buildings are used:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landuse

I hope your project is successful!

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On 3/21/20, Guillermo Ariel Silva Lopez  wrote:
> Hello, I am currently working on a project called Atlas Urbano (
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AtlasUrbano) where we seek to upload
> more data to mapped building polygons by the MapPYOSM project in different
> cities of Paraguay.
>
> The main idea is to be able to generate a first layer of general
> information on building uses that is scalable and replicable to all
> municipalities. For this, first we want to use more general tags, which can
> then be specified, already in a next stage.
>
> In this first layer of information we want to classify buildings into four
> general use categories:
>
> residential
>
> commercial
>
> General services
>
> mixed use
>
> The tags that exist, for residential and commercial, and we currently use
> are:
>
> building = residential
>
> building = commercial
>
>
> We also want to map general services for the population, which would be
> buildings that house activities intended to provide services. Educational
> buildings, health posts, public buildings, cultural centers, NGOs, etc. are
> included in this category. We did not find a suitable tag that encompasses
> all cases and, as we did not find an alternative, we want to propose using
> this tag, which will serve to designate generally urban services and
> facilities:
>
> building = general_services
>
>
> Finally, we want to map buildings that house two or more uses, and this
> translates to being buildings that house both residential and commercial
> programs, or commercial and general service programs; that is, mixed uses
> could encompass any possible combination of the three uses mentioned above.
> By not finding a tag that labels this combination of uses, we want to
> propose using this 

Re: [Tagging] General Tags for unmapped cities

[Guillermo Ariel Silva Lopez]

Hi Joseph, the mappers will survey the buildings with mapillary imagery
that we upload for them, these buildings are already mapped in the
Openstreetmap Database, but as a generic tag like "building=yes"


Guillermo Silva

El sáb., 21 mar. 2020 a las 0:12, Joseph Eisenberg (<
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>) escribió:

> Muchas gracias, Sr. Silva
>
> > we seek to upload more data to mapped building polygons by the MapPYOSM
> project in different cities of Paraguay.
>
> Do you mean that these buildings are already mapped in the
> Openstreetmap Database, but as a generic tag like "building=yes"?
>
> Or are you planning to import the shapes of buildings from an external
> database?
>
> If you are adding the tags due to local knowledge of the mappers,
> especially if the mappers survey the buildings, then that is great.
>
> If the data is coming from an external source, please read and follow
> the Import Guidelines and the Automated Edits Code of Conduct:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
>
> You may wish to look at how the key building=* is currently used:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building
>
> Most commonly, the key "building=*" describes how the building looks:
> for example, a building that was built as a church, but is now used as
> a theatre, is still a "building=church" but then you add
> "amenity=theatre" to show that it is used as a theatre.
>
> Residential, commercial and retail areas are mapped with the key
> Landuse and include the land around the buildings. In residential
> areas, this would include gardens, lawns, garages, parkings spaces,
> and so on, tagged landuse=residential. The buildings will be
> building=house, building=apartment, building=duplex, building=terrace
> and so on.
>
> In Commercial and Retail areas, the landuse area will include parking
> lots, service roads, service buildings, outdoor seating areas,
> courtyards, and so on, in the landuse=commercial or landuse=retail
> areas.
>
> And landuse=industrial includes the industrial facilities as well as
> warehouses, man_made=works (factories), service roads, parking lots,
> power lines, etc.
>
> There is currently no established tag for mixed-use urban areas, but
> most of these are tagged as landuse=retail, since retail is often the
> main use of the first floor or level of the buildings in a mixed-use
> area. If retail isn't the main use, rather offices plus hotels and
> some residential, it is common to use landuse=commercial for
> commercial+residential or office+hotel areas.
>
> In addition, mappers are encouraged to map the shops, offices, and
> other individual features within each building. A building=office will
> often contain one or more office=company, office=ngo, or
> office=government features. Retail buildings and landuse will contain
> one or more shop=* features
>
> See:
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office
>
> For public services, many things are found under office=government or
> amenity=*
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aoffice%3Dgovernment
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:amenity
>
> As a general overview, you can see the complete list of common
> features at Map Features:
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features
>
> Also see "How we map"
> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map
>
> And "how to map landuse" which includes a relatively complete list of
> tags related to how lands and buildings are used:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landuse
>
> I hope your project is successful!
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On 3/21/20, Guillermo Ariel Silva Lopez  wrote:
> > Hello, I am currently working on a project called Atlas Urbano (
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AtlasUrbano) where we seek to upload
> > more data to mapped building polygons by the MapPYOSM project in
> different
> > cities of Paraguay.
> >
> > The main idea is to be able to generate a first layer of general
> > information on building uses that is scalable and replicable to all
> > municipalities. For this, first we want to use more general tags, which
> can
> > then be specified, already in a next stage.
> >
> > In this first layer of information we want to classify buildings into
> four
> > general use categories:
> >
> > residential
> >
> > commercial
> >
> > General services
> >
> > mixed use
> >
> > The tags that exist, for residential and commercial, and we currently use
> > are:
> >
> > building = residential
> >
> > building = commercial
> >
> >
> > We also want to map general services for the population, which would be
> > buildings that house activities intended to provide services. Educational
> > buildings, health posts, public buildings, cultural centers, NGOs, etc.
> are
> > included in this category. We did not find a suitable tag that
> encompasses
> > all cases and, as we did not find an alternative, we wa

Re: [Tagging] General Tags for unmapped cities

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> Hi Joseph, the mappers will survey the buildings with mapillary imagery that 
> we upload for them, these buildings are already mapped in the Openstreetmap 
> Database, but as a generic tag like "building=yes"

Great. It is helpful to update the building tag to a more precise value.

But as mentioned above, the use of an area is usually mapped as a
larger landuse=retail/commercial/etc. feature around the buildings and
other surrounding land.

The building=* tag should describe what the building looks like. Often
that has something to do with it's function: a building of storefronts
with glass display windows will often be mapped as building=retail,
and a supermarket building is usually a special design and can be
tagged building=supermarket.

But residential buildings should be mapped based on the actual design:
like building=apartment, building=semidetached_house, building=house,
building=dormitory, and so on.

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On 3/21/20, Guillermo Ariel Silva Lopez  wrote:
> Hi Joseph, the mappers will survey the buildings with mapillary imagery
> that we upload for them, these buildings are already mapped in the
> Openstreetmap Database, but as a generic tag like "building=yes"
>
>
> Guillermo Silva
>
> El sáb., 21 mar. 2020 a las 0:12, Joseph Eisenberg (<
> joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>) escribió:
>
>> Muchas gracias, Sr. Silva
>>
>> > we seek to upload more data to mapped building polygons by the MapPYOSM
>> project in different cities of Paraguay.
>>
>> Do you mean that these buildings are already mapped in the
>> Openstreetmap Database, but as a generic tag like "building=yes"?
>>
>> Or are you planning to import the shapes of buildings from an external
>> database?
>>
>> If you are adding the tags due to local knowledge of the mappers,
>> especially if the mappers survey the buildings, then that is great.
>>
>> If the data is coming from an external source, please read and follow
>> the Import Guidelines and the Automated Edits Code of Conduct:
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
>>
>> You may wish to look at how the key building=* is currently used:
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building
>>
>> Most commonly, the key "building=*" describes how the building looks:
>> for example, a building that was built as a church, but is now used as
>> a theatre, is still a "building=church" but then you add
>> "amenity=theatre" to show that it is used as a theatre.
>>
>> Residential, commercial and retail areas are mapped with the key
>> Landuse and include the land around the buildings. In residential
>> areas, this would include gardens, lawns, garages, parkings spaces,
>> and so on, tagged landuse=residential. The buildings will be
>> building=house, building=apartment, building=duplex, building=terrace
>> and so on.
>>
>> In Commercial and Retail areas, the landuse area will include parking
>> lots, service roads, service buildings, outdoor seating areas,
>> courtyards, and so on, in the landuse=commercial or landuse=retail
>> areas.
>>
>> And landuse=industrial includes the industrial facilities as well as
>> warehouses, man_made=works (factories), service roads, parking lots,
>> power lines, etc.
>>
>> There is currently no established tag for mixed-use urban areas, but
>> most of these are tagged as landuse=retail, since retail is often the
>> main use of the first floor or level of the buildings in a mixed-use
>> area. If retail isn't the main use, rather offices plus hotels and
>> some residential, it is common to use landuse=commercial for
>> commercial+residential or office+hotel areas.
>>
>> In addition, mappers are encouraged to map the shops, offices, and
>> other individual features within each building. A building=office will
>> often contain one or more office=company, office=ngo, or
>> office=government features. Retail buildings and landuse will contain
>> one or more shop=* features
>>
>> See:
>> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop
>> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office
>>
>> For public services, many things are found under office=government or
>> amenity=*
>> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aoffice%3Dgovernment
>> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:amenity
>>
>> As a general overview, you can see the complete list of common
>> features at Map Features:
>> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features
>>
>> Also see "How we map"
>> - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map
>>
>> And "how to map landuse" which includes a relatively complete list of
>> tags related to how lands and buildings are used:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landuse
>>
>> I hope your project is successful!
>>
>> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>>
>> On 3/21/20, Guillermo Ariel Silva Lopez  wrote:
>> > Hello, I am currently working on a project called Atlas Urbano (
>> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AtlasUrbano) where we seek to
>> > upload
>> > mo