|
There are two methods of doing a pathway/sidewalk. Mark the building on top of it |
|
I think the way to think about this is how people might consume the data. A hiking or pedestrian routing app is unlikely to pull down details of all the buildings and then try & work out which paths are covered or obstructed by buildings (it's not unusual for buildings to obstruct paths on OSM even through in reality they don't). Splitting the path and adding covered=yes (or tunnel=building_passage if something more substantial than a roof canopy) is much more likely to be picked up by data consumers. You still need to map the building appropriately (because other consumers will be more interested in that aspect of OSM): take a looks at whether people typically add layer tags to building=roof or building=car_port. Making implicit information explicit through adding more tags is rarely a bad thing (sometimes it can be an impediment if the tagging needs to change), and is probably a longstanding trend on OSM. |
