On 20.01.19 19:37, Tobias Zwick wrote: > - a shop on level M with "level=M" > > - the mall building with "levels=P2,P1,G,M,1-12,14-99" (the order of the > levels). If levels is missing, a numerical order is assumed
So essentially, one uses the local level reference in level=*, and provides a mapping onto a standardized level sequence with separate, building-wide tags. Admittedly, I haven't really considered that yet. It's also interesting because I would have suggested the exact opposite: Using standardized level numbers in the level=* tag, and defining a mapping onto the local level references for display purposes. This is pretty much the current logic behind SIT. One comparatively minor issue with your approach is that it becomes harder for editors to provide basic indoor mapping support: Something like the level switcher currently available in JOSM won't work any more, because there would no longer be a consistent order of levels across buildings. You would need to select a building to edit first, and use a building-local level switcher. Manually-defined tag filters would likewise need to be updated, e.g. in order to support level ranges properly (a staircase tagged level=G-1 should be visible while editing level M). The main challenge I see with your proposal, though, is that the levels=* tag on the building would be utterly required to make any sense of the order of floors. Without it, applications would have no idea whether "M" is above or below "P2", for example. So at the very least, adding levels=* should explicitly be documented as mandatory when using non-standard levels. If we can get our fellow mappers to largely stick with such a rule, your idea would work. So would the existing solutions, though, and that "if" is something I am worried about. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
