Some named beaches have a small part dedicated to naturism, how do we map it? Nowadays they are mapped as a separate natural=beach (sometimes nested inside the bigger one), but this goes against One feature, one OSM element - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Another example I can think of is parkings. Bigger parkings often have sections with a ref (A1, A2, B1, B2 ecc.). How can we map them? Right now we can map the whole parking or single parking spaces. Do we add the same ref to every single parking space of that section?
Sometimes I saw people mapping big monuments/statues with two elements, one for the base and one for the statue with different height and min_heights. Again, this goes against âone feature one elementâ, but at the time we donât have other ways to map this level of detail. One example is the Gundam statue, which is mapped as a building instead of as a statue so that building:parts can be used.
We do have subdivisions for some elements, building:part for building, cemetery=sector for cemeteries, but we miss subdivision for other elements. Thoughts?
We do have subdivisions for some elements, building:part for building, cemetery=sector for cemeteries, but we miss subdivision for other elements. Thoughts?
for beaches specifically we have also leisure=beach_resort
If there are boundaries for rule sets we could declare these as âfeaturesâ and add nudism tags to something like boundary=behavior or dress_code or maybe cultural_rules: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:nudism
On the other hand I donât understand why the nudism tag couldnât stand on its own (besides the wiki documentation I mean)
Maybe leisure=outdoor_seating if they have furnitures on the beach? leisure=swimming_area for the water. tourism=theme_park have attraction=theme_area which may be comparable in some leisure= features. building:part= is only the subdivision structurally. Functionally, it may be indoor= ; or addr:unit= for âsometimes the way inside divides into different units or staircases, where certain apartments/flats/offices can only be reached through a specific unitâ , which shows the wide range it can apply from single shop spaces to entire buildings in industrial and business parks.
This is something I donât agree entirely for parking=street_side . Examples shown suggest separate amenity=parking can be drawn if separated by trees and other small objects easily on the same section. For carparks with different restrictions (eg hourly and monthly, unreserved and reserved), sometimes they donât have clear delineation, and can exist side-by-side. Carparks can also have multiple parking= areas, =surface , and =multi-storey or =underground .
In my opinion, an important question in this context is how to define one feature.
In OSM, when attributes of a feature change, we usually create a new object (e.g. roads divided into several parts when attributes change). If I see a group of bike racks, one part of which is covered and the other is not, then of course I create two objects directly next to each other, one of which is covered. In the same way, I also create different objects for car parking spaces, for example, if they differ in their attributes. I would also see no problem in dividing large parking spaces according to their ref.
The same goes for a nude beach - again, I donât see a problem with separating out a beach segment as long as no areas with the same properties overlap (as long as we donât have another way to put a complementary POI on the entire beach - Iâm not familiar with tagging there).
However, with the example of complex statues, I have no idea how to differentiate. I donât think this level of detail can be mapped in OSM at the moment. There was once an attempt for a database for 3D models, but that has not yet been successful. For most purposes, it is probably sufficient to simply add an image (or use building:parts, which I donât think is correct, but which seems to be âtoleratedâ in many similar cases).
You may want to have a look how German mappers have handled their FKK beaches on OSM. Itâs funny how one FKK hit in Italy called Lido di Dante has the beach tagged as swimming area.
I agree broadly. This is what I wrote in 2009: Proposal:Section. I donât think the problem has gone away. We have a number of solutions for some use-cases (forest compartment, cemetery sector, building:part), but not a coherent common approach.