|
Many restaurants have small pension attached to them. What is the reccomended way to map this? |
|
If accesible by patrons that are not staying in the hotel, I usually simply create a node for both (hotel and restaurant). 2
That also simplifies such stuff like
(06 Jan '16, 19:46)
aseerel4c26 ♦
1
This is probably the most useful approach, as there might be multiple amenities inside the building which are open to the general public, even if they're all operated by the hotel (e.g. a bar, a restaurant and a fitness here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3818622072 )
(07 Jan '16, 10:16)
Piskvor
I do it this way as well, but it gets ugly results. There are two identically named nodes on map and in results of searches etc, and somethimes it looks like a duplicate. Also in some maps the names are not rendered at all, because there are so close to each other, that the rendered rather shows randomly one of the icons. I know that it is not good to map for renderer, but this is mapping AGAINS renderer, because it has no good way to understand that these are two identical amenities (except somehow guessing from proximity and identical names).
(12 Jan '16, 01:06)
gorn
I see your point, and agree that the current usage is clumsy. Perhaps this could be solved by referencing each of the objects in a relation; however, the only similar suggestion that I have found is http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Operators , and that seems 1.not similar enough and 2.dead for some time :(
(12 Jan '16, 12:25)
Piskvor
|
|
Unfortunately there is no 100% good way to do it. Probably the best is to add another node or way (or the building) beside where the hotel is. In essense treating them as 2 separate, but very close to each other, objects. You can add separate data for each one separately. They might have different websites, phone numbers, names etc. |
|
How about using both |
I think you may have meant "*many hotels have a small restaurant", instead of the other way around ;)
either way :)