Hi, I have modified the mapping of the terminal building of Wroclaw Airport. I joined the separately mapped buildings at the gates with the main terminal building. I also kept the layer tag of the smaller buildings since they overlap with highway=service ways. This is how for example the terminal buildings at Warsaw Airport and Gdansk and many other airports are mapped for a long time. I did not invent anything new. My changeset got reverted only a few minutes later (Changeset: 164529002 | OpenStreetMap). When I asked why, I got the answer that what I did was vandalism and that I destroyed features. I still think that what I did wasnāt any of this and that my change was legit. I could not convince this person with my reasoning and links to the wiki. Instead the mapper stopped answering.
I think that it was wrong and unfair to accuse me of vandalism. What do you think about this?
Donāt worry, Iāve been reading the discussion. I donāt think your edit was correct. I have now added more tags to the buildings so theyāre rendered better by 3D renderers.
I see your edits but some to not make sense. building:levels=* and building:min_level should not be the same.
Additionally I still think that the smaller parts of the building should be tagged with building:part=yes while all of them together should be included in the main part of the building. In other words one building containing everything and additionally building:part for the any of the sections.
Also every section is now tagged aeroway=terminal. That looks like we have 13 terminals at this airport now. There were 7 before I made one out of them. What made you change your opinion on how many buildings we are talking about?
I suggest we wait for more opinions on whether this should be one building or 7 or 13 before making more edits.
Youāre right, I misread the diagram on the wiki.
Not all of them are one building in my opinion. Also I donāt think itās right to map it this way. building:part should be used to map seperate stuff and not an existing part mapped as building. How do 3D renderers handle this?
There are multiple ways to interpret the wiki on this tag. It seems that the tag really only exists so that buildings have different colours. Other than that it isnāt very useful.
Areas with the tag building:part=* allow you to split a building into parts that differ in terms of some attributes or the function.
Those areas are optional, and used in addition to a building=* area. building:part=* areas should always be contained within a building=* area that represents the entire building. If building:part=* is used for 3D-tagging, keep in mind that the building=* area might not get rendered by some 3D-renderers if building:part=* is used anywhere in the building.
so there is some conflict between the definition and the way you think it should be used.
Donāt know how many buildins, but sure that there should be only one aeroway=terminal if there is only one terminal at this airport.
Bigger airports have several terminals, each with their own name and other attributes, but that doesnāt seems to be the case here.
Even more, the āCargo Terminalā in the same airport is tagged with aeroway=terminal and building=transportation, but those tags should be used only if passengers use these facilities. See Tag:aeroway=terminal
An airport terminal is a building at an airport where passengers transfer between ground transportation and the facilities that allow them to board and disembark from aircraft.
Iāve corrected the building and everything should be correct now.
@muralito I saw you removed the aeroway=terminal tag from the cargo terminal. Iād suggest removing it from other cargo terminals in Poland for consistency.
Though Iām not really sure if thatās correct since they still have āterminalā in their names. Maybe we should use something along the lines of aeroway=cargo_terminal instead?
The building seems correct to me now. I would have done it including the detail of the roof as building:part=roof), and not as a building by itself.
Yes. It is a good idea.
The name of an element does not has influence in how should be tagged in OSM. Each tag should be used according to the description of the wiki. Without that standarization the data loses value. Of course, you can add that aeroway=cargo_terminal tag or something like that, but is better to follow the community process of discussing, suggesting and formalizing new tags or new values.
@Mateusz_Konieczny, what do you suggest according to your experience in the OSM Tagging List?