https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |
have a look at this other one, https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3199085#map=18/47.50709/19.04587
Thank you very much, James! It's funny, that example makes the opposite I was considering: he uses building=office (I believe building=public may be more accurate) and amenity=public_building (which the wiki states that is highly discouraged http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:amenity and prompts to tag with office=government).
Maybe the correct tagging would be building=office
office=government
but I have my concerns whereas using building=office instead of building=public
The Palace of Westminister - http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1567699#map=17/51.49943/-0.12456 has tourism = attraction, office = government, and building = yes
How about tourism=attraction, office=government, government=legislative, building=yes? Use of these specific office & government tags are already documented in wiki.
I work here, the building has two distinct parts where the public can go and where they can't go unless on a tour. The two large grey sections next to the Parliament cafe icon are the only public areas, everything else is space devoted to staff. Maybe the tagging could be split? Hope that helps.
It's time to resolve this old note :-)
Some suggested keys/values would suit well here:
- tourism = attraction,
- office = government,
- government=legislative (see government=legislative -- "legislative" has been used more than "parliament" according to taginfo).
Rather than building = yes, I would suggest building=public (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dpublic)
And indeed, as the building has two distinctive parts (thanks for your contribution), we could use access=public/private for the different parts of this building (multipolygon) and maybe add a description to explain that a bit more.
Remark: this building has been edited since this discussion started. It is now tagged as tourism=attraction, office=government, government=legislative, but building=parliament. Note as well that the surroundings are mapped as well with name=The Scottish Parliament, the Korean name as well and tourism=attraction. This should probably be removed, except for the Korean name (to add to the main multipolygon)
Let me know what you think and I'll map it accordingly.
It sounds good to me to use the proposed tagging + access using multipolygons. +1
I have changed the tagging of buildings to government in line with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building#Civic.2FAmenity, and added access=yes/private plus names, moved the Korean name to the main relation, removed the duplicate tourism attraction, and fixed a few details