Talk:Tag:building=terrace

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Word "terrace" has several meanings

There is definitely a problem with this tag. Terrace can both mean an open space outside a shop (restaurant, cafe, etc.) and a row of houses. See the Wiktionary [1] for details. I propose to use 2 tags to differentiate them:

1. building=terrace for a platform that extends outwards from a building.

2. building=row_house for the row of houses

And again, someone could use the term terrace as a way to tag a way of farming (terrace farming). I don't have a clue for this one though.

--baldurmen 17:46, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Yet a "platform that extends outwards from a building" is not "a building", so that's not a building=terrace. Alv (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Some restaurants have covered or partially covered terraces so this could be mistaken for a building=terrace. —M!dgard [ talk | projects | current proposal ] 14:42, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't think these are buildings. Perhaps man_made=terrace.--Jojo4u (talk) 18:02, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the word terrace on its own is ambiguous. See A terrace may refer to... Danrok (talk) 01:22, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I see no problem with this. The platform is not building and there is description of what building=terrace means. There are more ambigous words and we live with them. Chrabros (talk) 13:44, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
I also think terrace is ambiguous! Why we don't use building=row_house? It is more clearly and easier to understand for non-native English speaker. --MasiMaster (talk) 00:07, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
I refactored the article, the main take is now that this is a less-detailed way to tag a terrace. I find terrace as a word not perfect but okay, it's British and wikipedia has it under "terrace house". We have 200.000+ objects now and a mass-retagging will not get approved in these times.--Jojo4u (talk) 18:00, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Stating that terrace is not ambiguous while having to state that we should not use this to describe an extension... At least a redirection on the page saying how to describe a flat raised platform should be present on that page. Mass-retagging would make sense: terraced_house or row_house would be better. Not a building? As said, sometimes it is. For instance in France terraces get more and more covered due to non smoking rules insides pubs and restaurants, but then it's more a verandah.
The issue I see is that I see some (uncovered) terraces imported from the French Cadastre appears as building=yes. For instance https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id#map=21/47.62649/-3.18108
To add some more confusion the Wikipedia article describing a flat raised platform is named... Terrace (building). Correct naming as building has several meanings too! But the article corresponding to this page is terraced house (maybe more American than British English). Row_house is self explaining, no need to be native British English speaker. Or having worked in UK too ;-).
--Nospam2005 (talk) 20:23, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

How to add separate dwellings?

The page says "Consider defining each dwelling separately using building=house"

How should I add the separate nodes?

Using separate nodes overlaying the building=terrace area? But there are some who insists that building= is for areas only and should not be used on nodes.

Or should I use the several areas tagged buidling=house and place them over building=terrace? JOSM does not like it and reports overlaying buildings. And I to not like it as well.

So what is the suggested way?

Chrabros (talk) 13:44, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

The building=terrace should be replaced by the building=house. I.e. no object with building=terrace remains afterwards.--Jojo4u (talk) 17:42, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
And yet the architecture of each individual building is still that of a 'terrace'! Same with a semi-detached house - each side is still semi-detached. I leave them as a terrace and level it up to the geometry to show that they are mapped individually or combined. Warin61 (talk) 23:14, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Town Houses in the San Fernando Valley

"These are known as "row-house" or "townhouse" in North American English, with townhouse generally used to evoke a more upper-class impression" This isn´t really true, at least in Los Angeles (Specifically in the San Fernando Valley area), town houses are usually considered gated communities for the middle class. "Gated community" implies upper class much more than "townhouse". Of course it really depends on the neighborhood in which itś located, if a townhouse complex is located in a predominantly upper class area, then it could be considered upper class; however, townhouses in lower class neighborhoods are of course considered lower class. It really depends on the neighborhood and as far as class-related impressions go, townhouses are neutral. But in reality this is pretty irrelevant to the map. Because in the end, a townhouse is a townhouse.

After some more checking on [2] I removed the "upper class" distinction. Townhouses are described there not as "impression" but as having real differences:
The distinction between living units called apartments and those called townhouses is that townhouses usually consist of multiple floors and have their own outside door as opposed to having only one level and/or having access via an interior hallway or via an exterior balcony-style walkway (more common in the warmer climates). Another distinction is that in most areas of the US outside of the very largest cities, apartment refers to rental housing, and townhouse typically refers to an individually owned dwelling, although the term townhouse-style (rental) apartment is also heard.
--Jojo4u (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2016 (UTC)