Conclusion for my own mapping efforts from the discussion so far: start with stacked amenities until you know something about the campsite topology, then make nodes/polygons per amenity.
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 12:58 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Am 28.03.2015 um 12:26 schrieb Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com>: > > > > If I am on a large campsite I want to use "the map" to find my way to > all amenities. If you have put everything on 1 node it's a pretty useless > map, not ? > > > +1, IMHO the ideal mapping should be an area for the camp site, and > features should be mapped inside this area as objects on their own (i.e. no > need to repeat those as attributes on the camp site). > A specialized camping map could see from the data which features are > available on a certain site (because this information is spatially > available) > > On the other hand this requires some processing / advanced querying and > might be too expensive for general maps, so a basic scheme with rough site > types for the camp site object ((1-2 attributes should be sufficient) seem > reasonable as well. > > Cheers > Martin > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
