User talk:Travelling salesman
I saw that you added building=digester to the list, I think that it would be better to have man_made=digester instead. After all we also have man_made for gasometer, hot water tank and waste_water_plant. On the tagging mailing list someone suggested to use man_made=bioreactor, because that is more understandable. Before I change the page, I would like to hear your opinion.
--Escada (talk) 03:51, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- I think it is generally good to have building=something instead of just building=yes, because there are so many types of buildings and it can make sense to distinguish them. As for digesters/bioreactors I don't have a stong opinion. If you like you can change the definition in the wiki and make it building=yes + man_made=bioreactor for instance. That would be fine with me! --Travelling salesman (talk) 11:01, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- That's because everything that is a building should be tagged as a building. I mean, it is built, it has some volume, everybody will recognize it as a building. Sure it can be man_made to attribute a certain meaning to it, but leaving out the building-tag for certain types of building seems very strange to me. --Travelling salesman (talk) 12:23, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
The problem seems to be what we exactly understand by the word "building". My Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary has this: "Building: a structure such as a house or school that has a roof and walls".
To me a cooling tower or digester is not a building (although it is definitely built).
--Marczoutendijk (talk) 15:38, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Yes that is exactly the question, what is a building? A digester has a roof and walls, and it has the dimensions of a typical building, so I would definitively view it as a building (cooling towers as well, despite the lacking roof). But I can certainly understand if there are different opinions on it. Also, is a roof at a gas station a building? A ruin, a small shed, various towers, storage tanks, a houseboat? It's not always very clear. For a map I would somewhat concentrate on the outside appeareance, but also on how the multitude of different objects can be categorized and displayed reasonably by any software using the database. Having these objects as buildings is certainly not a disadvantage. --Travelling salesman (talk) 15:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- You can look at the definitions found on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonbuilding_structure and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_building_types. According to those pages, "Structures designed to support, contain or convey liquid or gaseous matter" are not buildings.
- Ok, according to that wiki page, digesters are rather structures than buildings. But according to that same definition page even the Eiffel Tower is not a building, which however appears as a building in OSM and that makes perfect sense. So it is a possibility to split buildings and structures (= man_made) into two categories. Then however it would be desirable that at least the main renderers supported both of them fully (12 years since OSM exists), otherwise it is very discouraging to use those tags. --Travelling salesman (talk) 19:17, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- You can look at the definitions found on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonbuilding_structure and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_building_types. According to those pages, "Structures designed to support, contain or convey liquid or gaseous matter" are not buildings.