|
Howdy, folks! I've just finished the tutorial provided on the OSM site and have started adding data to a new area in my city. I've only added one building (a local Whole Foods) so far. After outlining the building, the editor presented me with various options to fill out (name, address, opening hours, phone and fax number, etc.) and I added in the store's data from the official website. The buildings and stores around this one mapped by other OSMers have all taken similar approaches. However, referring to the OSM tutorial, I recall a Pizza Hut building that did not have this data as part of the building area's metadata but rather as a superimposed point's metadata. I'm confused as to whether the information that I ended up adding to the Whole Foods store's building area metadata should be removed and instead moved to a superimposed point over that area. What's the proper convention? edit: Also, concerning building/store naming conventions: for buildings with multiple entities within (malls, office spaces, etc.), would the building information go in the area metadata and the individual entity (stores within the mall, offices within the space, etc.) information go in point metadata? |
|
There are 2 conventions, point or area, which you mention. You are free to use either. Both are right. Personally I prefer the "area" if possible/known because it conveys more information. If you have the area of the shop, then you know how big it is, and hence if it's a teeny little corner shop, or a massive super store. This information is lost if you just have it as a point. Indoor mapping is also possible, for example in a shopping centre/mall. You can map corridors and rooms, and in this case an area for the shop is (IMO) better. |
sorry for closing this question earlier, I mistakenly opened it in 2 tabs and thought it was a duplicate