Fareham (UK) Shopping Centre is a large building. One wing of it contains Fareham Health Centre and the Job Centre. Would it be permissible to divide the building on the map, so that those two parts could be named separately, even though the entire building is physically connected? If not, is there another way to get the rendered map to show which parts of the building contain the Health Centre and the Job Centre?

asked 25 Jan '12, 20:06

Madryn's gravatar image

accept rate: 13%

This is what I did recently as the three companies have various percentages of the overall building http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.336068&lon=-0.205438&zoom=18&layers=M

permanent link

answered 12 Feb '12, 23:03

andy%20mackey's gravatar image

andy mackey
accept rate: 4%

The answer the the question called 'One building, two tenants' seems relevant to this question as well. I have decided to map the Health Centre and Job Centre as nodes at their respective entrances, which is what people really want to know about. I need to visit the site again to find the exact location of the Job Centre entrance - won't be long.

permanent link

answered 11 Feb '12, 11:51

Madryn's gravatar image

accept rate: 13%

Yes - both approaches are used and both are "correct" - it's down the person actually mapping the building to decide what fits best for a particular location.

(11 Feb '12, 12:28) SomeoneElse ♦

The answer to this depends on the situation. Are there parts of the building that have different names, or are there different facilities within the building that have their own names?

Both approaches avoid splitting the building outline.

Facilities within the building

If facilities within the building have their own name, then the usual solution for mapping is:

  • Draw the building outline as building=yes with the name of the building as a whole.
  • Place the facilities as nodes or smaller areas within the building outline, add the appropriate tag (such as office=employment_agency for a job centre and their respective name tags.

Building parts

If it is actually the building parts that have names - say, one wing of the building is known as "Foobar wing" -, then the situation would need to be tagged differently.

One possible solution is the building:part=yes tag (not yet properly documented, unfortunately). It can be used to map areas within a larger building=yes outline as a building part. That building part can then have tags that are different from the tags of the building as a whole.

That tag has been discussed originally in the context of building mapping for 3D visualization, where one building part might e.g. have a different number of levels than other parts of the same building. But there is no reason why it couldn't be applied to other situations where tags, such as name, only apply to one part of the building.

permanent link

answered 25 Jan '12, 21:23

Tordanik's gravatar image

accept rate: 34%

edited 26 Jan '12, 00:38

There is no problems in drawing two building on the map where the buildings are connected structuraly. It does not matte wether it is one or two buildings, and there can be cases where it is hard to distinguish how many building there actualy are. Just have two ways that share a set of nodes where the buildings connect.

permanent link

answered 25 Jan '12, 21:12

Gnonthgol's gravatar image

Gnonthgol ♦
accept rate: 16%

edited 25 Jan '12, 22:46


The question asks about "a large building", not about two buildings that are connected.

(25 Jan '12, 21:25) Tordanik
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here



Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:


question asked: 25 Jan '12, 20:06

question was seen: 5,550 times

last updated: 12 Feb '12, 23:03

powered by OSQA