[talk-ch] Map consistency - private floating islands
mailinglist at osm.datendelphin.net
Sat Jul 7 11:24:03 CEST 2018
You can model ways through buildings quite normally. I don't think you
should add tunnel=yes, but indoor=yes or if it is a passage, you can use
and of course add the appropriate access tags if it is private.
For publicly accessible parks (with or without a fee) the entrance
through a house should be modelled. But for private stuff like your
example, don't hesitate to mark it as a false positive and move on.
There is no need, nor is it possible, to map all the private property
On 07/07/18 10:50, Kai Pankrath wrote:
> Hi all,
> I am working on the map quality using https://www.keepright.at (as well
> as http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/) and encountered the “floating
> island” problem (ways not connected to the rest of the map). I came
> across one specific situation and can think of another:
> 1. The way is in a private garden and the only access would be
> “through” the house (physical entering through the main entrance and
> potentially entering a garden through a terrace door) like here:
> 2. I have not found a good example, but you can think of a park with
> limited access and entrance as well as exit are only possible
> through the building (e.g. a castle or museum where you pay a fee to
> access other areas).
> Basic question: How to map that? I see one option for private ways: I
> would simply add “access=private” and any consistency checker could pick
> that up in the future ignoring “private” islands. For more public-like
> situations I am not so sure. Adding a highway=footway/tunnel=yes
> (+layer?) through the building? Adding properties at the end points of
> the way networks similar to amenity=parking_entrance (+creating a
> relation between these points)? Any suggestions?
> talk-ch mailing list
> talk-ch at openstreetmap.ch
More information about the talk-ch