2018-09-24 11:55 GMT+02:00 Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:
> Well, OsmAnd lets you see different categories of buildings in different > colors. I was actually going to try this out in a branch of the standard > style (Openstreetmap Carto) to see if it could help. > Right now the main categories of buildings fit with the areas: > building=retail with landuse=retail > building=office with landuse=commercial > building=school with amenity=school etc > > And if restaurants are a type of retail, the building type should be a > subcategory of retail. I am not even sure if restaurants are a type of retail. It may well depend on the definitions which might not be the same on a global level. It is up to you to decide whether a restaurant building is a subtype of retail or a type on its own (and everybody can do it as she pleases if you tag building=restaurant) but if you subtag like retail=restaurant it is enforced that it must be seen as a subtype of retail. We do not do subtagging with building=residential (if there is a more precise term like house, apartments, etc.), why would we do it for restaurants? Looking around in the internet, it seems that restaurants are not even clearly retail landuse (nor would I restrict tagging building typology to landuse classes). E.g. "In some downtown commercial zoning districts restaurant uses are categorized simply as retail businesses and are not treated differently from other retail uses, while in other districts the definitions for restaurants uses are regulated specifically." http://sf-planning.org/restaurantfood-service-use Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
