Talk:3D development/Tagging

Accepted tag attributes

Hi, so what do you think about what attributes are accepted by the community, which might be removed/altered to increase the usage for 3D attributes? --!i! 11:44, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Not only buildings?

Are there any ideas on how to add informations to non buildign significant objects? For example statues or other monuments in a generic way? --!i! 11:46, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

How do you map levels?

On Russian forum we had a discussion some time ago. The problem is: most buildings of > 12 levels have technical floors (not sure that's correct term in English) in addition to habitable ones, and there was two opinions on what should be put into building:levels. Some suggested it should be total number of levels, because it's, well, number of levels, while others suggested it should be number of habitable levels because in everyday life we say "N-level building" and we don't include non-living levels into that N. Here are examples of such buildings:

http://amdmi3.ru/files/osm/levels/1.jpg http://amdmi3.ru/files/osm/levels/2.jpg

For the right one on the second picture we'd say "17-level building", while physically it has 18 levels.

Now, building:levels is used more actively for 3D applications, and, well, levels is levels, so building:levels=* should likely hold a total number of levels, and for mapping habitable ones building:levelPlan=* or alike (I'd prefer something like building:levels:habitable, as levelplan is too complex and non-ground-level-is-one friendly) should be used. Do you have such a problem in other countries? --AMDmi3 20:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Well I never thought it in detail but yes there were some discussions (I think on TALK mailinglist) concerning the groundlevel and levels in general. Personally I always used "number of window rows" if this is representative to the building. So if there are +4 levels non habitat levels I would add them cause they are significant to the height. But for your example I would count the windows, only --!i! 20:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

That seems inconsistent. I think this should be documented more thoughtfully, as some people map physical levels and other people map habitable levels, while both should be distinctively mapped actually --AMDmi3 18:23, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

That might be useful, yes. On the other hand, in the worst case it is +-2 levels by misintepretation, right? --!i! 20:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Not taking some bizarre cases (there are buildings with technical levels in the middle, or some industrial buildings with every even floor being technical) into account, yes. I'm also wondering whether building:levels:aboveground=* can be used for tagging physical levels. --AMDmi3 21:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

To me this sounds logical cause it implys the method in the name and doesn't invent another tag that might this "easy" levels attribute more complex --!i! 08:08, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Multipart buildings

To get a nice LOD1 for buildings where parts have different heigts, you have to splitup the single polygon into parts. Do we have to recombine them for better rendering (esp. no cluttering in 2D rendered Maps)?

Roof modelling

There are different modelling approachs to get the details of a roof

• attributes describing roof
• extra roof objects

What should we support?

Feature matrix: tags supported only for compatibility reasons

I intentionally did not add "est_height" as one of the tags supported by OSM2World because I do not want to encourage its use. I'm using it if it is there, but with lowest priority. If OSM2World is the only tool to use that tag, please leave the line out. (By the way, why did you remove the "yes" entries for building:min_level and min_height?) --Tordanik

Hi, I created template:legacy to mark this kind of entries. Will be usefull, if we finished our specs, too. Sorry wasn't my intension to remove your changes. But yesterday we had a editing conflict and obviously it was just to late :) --!i! 07:11, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Experiences

Hi, I started a discussion about what works good and what not about 3D tagging of features: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=19730 --!i! 17:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)