Tobias Knerr wrote:
>Randy wrote:
>>I propose that an additional property for highway of "covered=yes" be used
>>for this and similar situations, where a road extends under a building,
>>roof attached to a building, etc.
>
>If I understand you correctly, this tag is supposed to be used for
>ways/areas that are under buildings, not for hallways, rooms etc.
>inside buildings.
>
>You chose an example that is clearly not a tunnel ("open on three
>sides"), though. Therefore, some additional examples: Which of the
>following, if any, would use covered=yes?
In my opinion,
>
>http://www.bahnfotokiste.de/s_bahn/blankenese/blankenese_6.html
Covered on the left, probably covered on the right, but I would have no
problem with tunnel on the right.
>
>http://www.skyduck.de/In_Japan/In_Wort_Bild/Sights_Festivals/Osaka_Trip/Building.jpg
Toss up. Could be covered or tunnel. (Or how about another tag
"road_piercing_middle_of_building=yes") Tunnel would probably be more
appropriate, but considering how complex the layering is, I'd probably be
lazy and just say covered. (Leave it to the Japanese :-) I was in Osaka
last May, but unfortunately didn't have the privilege of gazing on this
beauty.
>
>http://tobias-knerr.de/misc/osmexamples/NK_s.jpg
>(the always-open "gate" in the building in the background)
>
I can't tell if that is a vehicle road or a pedestrian way. In either
case, I'd probably call it a tunnel.
>http://tobias-knerr.de/misc/osmexamples/Durchlauferhitzer_s.jpg
Definitely covered. The layer tagging here isn't as difficult at my case
of a building with a contiguous floor over a parking area. I would have no
problem tagging the pedestrian overpass as layer=1 while tagging both
buildings and road as layer=0, but I'd still call this covered, not a
tunnel.
There is certainly some personal judgement invoked in differentiating some
of these. I think of the characteristics of "covered" as either being
wider than long, relatively open, or having some flexibility in travel
direction, such as my original example (which would not apply to railed).
My rendering suggestion for "covered" was oriented toward vehicle
highways. A different rendering would be appropriate for covered cycle and
pedestrian ways, as long as it distinguished them from their respective
open ways.
I have not attempted mapping any building interiors at this point, so
don't really know if the "covered=yes" tag would be appropriate for
non-higways or not. Also, I haven't done enough tagging in that area of
waterways to feel confident saying whether I think "covered" would be
useful in that area, either.
Those are very interesting cases you showed. Thanks.
--
Randy
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
