> As one of the few data consumers who is already evaluating whether > objects are attached to other objects (for 3D rendering purposes), I'm > naturally interested in the topic.
You are exactly the kind of person I wanted to hear from! > Your approach does seem narrow in that it only works for things attached > to masts. However, the objects you name as examples (cameras, > billboards, traffic signs, ...) can also be attached to street lamps, > walls, buildings and many other object types. Ideally, I would like a > solution that works for those cases as well. Great point! Perhaps a role can be added as `support`? That way, one (or multiple) supports can be added to the relation, and each can have their own characteristics (such as mast, pole, street light, bollard, etc.?) > At the moment, I'm relying on the support key. I think it makes sense to keep the support key to add to each element and also for simple supports like pure street lights, I do not intend for this relation to replace the support tag. > One benefit of your approach is that it works for situations where the > mast itself is not mapped as a physical object at all. It also makes > both the relationship and the vertical order of the attached objects > explicit. That's the idea! Then each can have their own key without needing complicated semicolon lists or omitting part of what is truly there just because it is not able to be tagged. > my main ask would be for any such solution to > not be mast-only. I'm open to another name, I was trying to be as generic as possible to include things as small as street signs and stop signs to huge things like large billboards or telecommunication towers. On Fri, Mar 7, 2025, at 2:16 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote: > On 06.03.25 at 20:46, thigpen--- wrote via Tagging: >> MAST RELATION > > As one of the few data consumers who is already evaluating whether > objects are attached to other objects (for 3D rendering purposes), I'm > naturally interested in the topic. > > Your approach does seem narrow in that it only works for things attached > to masts. However, the objects you name as examples (cameras, > billboards, traffic signs, ...) can also be attached to street lamps, > walls, buildings and many other object types. Ideally, I would like a > solution that works for those cases as well. > > At the moment, I'm relying on the support key: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:support > For example, if something is tagged support=street_lamp, I'm looking for > the closest street lamp. This approach does not require any relations. > This means the relationship is only expressed implicitly, but it is > arguably easier to map. > > One benefit of your approach is that it works for situations where the > mast itself is not mapped as a physical object at all. It also makes > both the relationship and the vertical order of the attached objects > explicit. > > A possible compromise might be to only use a relation-based approach in > situations where the implicit relationship might be ambiguous. As I said > in the beginning, though, my main ask would be for any such solution to > not be mast-only. > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
