Hey guys!
I’ve tagged quite some schools already, and I’ve always stuck to the rules according to the wiki, but now I’m having issues, and I’m questioning some of the wiki rules, and wanted feedback.
Case 1: 4 schools on 1 ground
My first case is 4 schools sharing one ground – but not everything on the ground. It’s 2 primary schools and 2 (what Americans would call) high schools. They share the cafeteria and the sports hall, but the parking spaces, for example, are shared by the two primary schools, or the two high schools. Some of the school buildings’ rooms are used exclusively by 1 school, some are shared between either 1, 2 or 3 schools – depending on the rooms.
According to the documentation in the wiki, I started with a huge landuse=education that encompassed all 4 schools, and the 2 sport halls, as well as the cafeteria. Basically everything that belonged to any of the schools and if commonly referred to as the “school center X”.
I then drew one way for each amenity=school, and only included features that are exclusively used but that school. This meant that there were no overlapping amenity=schools whatsoever.
This leads to the parking spaces not being assigned to any school, because they are all used by at least 2 schools. But now the database has no way of knowing to which schools they belong. And the same for some of the rooms: Everything that is shared, doesn’t have an amenity=school around it, only the landuse=education. This way, it’s impossible to tell which of the 4 schools share which rooms or other features.
And now the question: wouldn’t it make more sense to overlap the amenity=school-areas, so that if a parking space or room belongs to more than 1 school, all will have the feature inside their way? This way we could tell exactly which schools use which parking space(s).
The alternative would be to use site-relations for each school, which doesn’t forbid putting features like a parking space inside multiple relations, but it wouldn’t work as nicely for the rooms, unless I’d map the indoor bits of the school. Using overlapping ways would work nicely in this situation, and I wouldn’t use it for features that are used by all schools equally (like the cafeteria and the sport halls), because they were actually built to belong to that “school center X”, in contrast to "school A sharing some rooms with school B. But I’m open to do this differently as well.
So basically: what’s the reason for not wanting overlap, if the meaning should be “used by both/all three”?
Case 2: satellite school building
There’s a school building that belonged to an independent school once, but that school has been dissolved, and the whole school building, plus its school yard, is now shared by 2 other schools, which are ~800 m (0.5 miles) and 1200 m (0.75 miles) away. So both schools have 2 external school grounds they share with each other. Similar to case 1, because everything is shared, I can only tag the whole thing with landuse=education, but there’s no way anyone would guess to which schools this actually belongs. There are no rooms reserved for only 1 of the schools, they share the whole building and school ground.
I see 3 ways of solving this:
- Create an MP for each school with 2 outlines, again, the
landuse=educationof the satellite school shared by both MPs. Overlapping → evil? - Create a site-relation for each school, and reference both school grounds. Create just a POI node for each school on the ground of the primary school building, so it’s clear what’s the main building without looking at the address data
- Adding
description=*-notes to the shared school grounds, and hoping somehow someone will see this (unlikely).
Which one would you prefer and why, resp. what problems do you possibly see with each of the approaches?
Nota bene: I’m not trying to overthrow the current wiki documentation, because it has been voted on, but I’m seeing issues where it’s causing ambiguity, and I don’t like ambiguity. Maybe I’m – again – overcomplicating things.
