Hi Rob, We already had this discussion some time ago. There wasn't a complete consensus on the matter, but here is how I tag now:
One amenity per building: the addr: tags and the amenity tags on the building outline. One or multiple entrance nodes on the outline. Several amenities per building, but each with it's own entry: addr: on the building outline, multiple entrance nodes on the outline, amenity tags on the entrance nodes. Several amenities per building with more than one amenity per door: addr:* on the building outline, several entrance nodes along the outline, amenity tags on extra nodes near the entrances inside the building outline. Several addresses per building: addr:* tags on entrance nodes along the building outline. Some also prefer to put amenities and building into a site relation. Pros: scales the solution with the complexity of the problem. Cons: not very consistent, renders poorly Regards, Chaos Am 30.11.2012 23:42 schrieb "Rob Nickerson" <rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com>: > ---------- Forwarding message from talk as more appropriate to tagging > list ---------- > > Hi, > > A mapper who is new to my area is interested in mapping disabled access at > a micro level. Specifically he would like to achieve door-to-door mapping > for key shops and amenities, and has made a good start by adding entrance > doors to several buildings. > > My Question: > > Where should amenity=* and addr:*=* be tagged? One suggestion was to add > all the detail to the entrance node, but this seems odd to me. For single > occupancy buildings I suggested tagging the building as amenity=*, etc as > the entrance node on the building can be easily matched with these. > > But what about a building with multiple occupants and entrances. For > example 2 shops in one building. One option is to tag the building with > building=yes and then add the amenity tags to individual nodes, but then > how would door to door routing work? An alternative is to just split the > building in to 2 areas (but technically its 1 building). Can we use some > form of indoor mapping (e.g. room=yes, amenity=*)? > > Is there a better solution? All ideas welcome. > > Regards, > Rob > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
