You are not logged in.

#1 2020-03-07 17:13:00

maro21
Member
From: Wrocław
Registered: 2018-03-06
Posts: 794

tower height

There is a tower which was mapped in 3D and looked exactly like it is.
This is how it looks in real:
https://fotopolska.eu/553178,foto.html?o=b8807

Some time ago a new user changed the tower height from 0.1 to its actual height: 90.3.

and after the change, it looked like this:
https://postimg.cc/Y4rB0MQX

height=0.1 is neccessary for 3D tagging because without it, it looks like in the picture above.

So I reverted his change.

OSM feature: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/312927675/history

Then another user removed building=yes and changed height=0.1 to height=90.3.
Now it completely disappeared from 3D view:
https://i.postimg.cc/tJW3rGvZ/iglica3.png
https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=51.1076055& … heta=44.48

What is the solution? How to solve this issue?

Last edited by maro21 (2020-03-08 23:21:58)

Offline

#2 2020-03-07 18:37:03

muralito
Member
Registered: 2012-09-04
Posts: 1,895

Re: tower height

Looking at the photo, tagging height=90.3 is what the wiki says it's ok.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:height wrote:

The key height=* describes the actual height of a feature.

Now you tagged as man_made=tower.
Maybe a better tagging is man_made=mast.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dmast

Unlike a man_made=tower which is accessible and provides platforms, a man_made=mast only offers ladder steps to climb it on the outside. Often masts are built to hold antennas.

If you want that a 3D render looks like the photo, you should map a more representative 3D model. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings for examples.

Offline

#3 2020-03-08 23:23:40

maro21
Member
From: Wrocław
Registered: 2018-03-06
Posts: 794

Re: tower height

I rewrote my post, please read it again.

Offline

#4 2020-03-09 09:19:45

Negreheb
Member
From: Austria
Registered: 2015-11-10
Posts: 584

Re: tower height

maro21 wrote:

...
height=0.1 is neccessary for 3D tagging because without it, it looks like in the picture above.
...

Well, like it was pointed out to me in another thread, you made the exact same mistake: We don't tag for the renderer. height=0.1 is exactly that. The correct height of that building is 90.3 and so it should be tagged like this. Maybe add an building:shape=pyramid as well and it might look a little bit more like in real and it also reflects the reality way more. Another idea is, create building:part=yes and, one thats exact the shape of the whole building with a small height and a pyramide for the bottom one. And a smaller building:part=yes for the centered one for the whole height.

And if i see it correctly you should add a min-height as well, because its not on the ground as well.

I personally would just add the building:shape=pyramid.

Last edited by Negreheb (2020-03-09 09:20:25)

Offline

#5 2020-03-09 17:32:25

pyram
Member
Registered: 2012-06-16
Posts: 1,318

Re: tower height

maro21 wrote:

Then another user removed building=yes and changed height=0.1 to height=90.3.

This Objekt isn't a building. So that was correct. If 3D-Renderer doesn't show this, it's another problem.

Offline

#6 2020-03-10 00:17:48

maro21
Member
From: Wrocław
Registered: 2018-03-06
Posts: 794

Re: tower height

Negreheb wrote:

I personally would just add the building:shape=pyramid.

There isn't such tag on OSM, it is used only 19 times.

pyram wrote:

This Objekt isn't a building. So that was correct. If 3D-Renderer doesn't show this, it's another problem.

So no one has ever drawn a tower in 3D on OSM? If so, could you give some examples?

Offline

#7 2020-03-10 09:16:08

Negreheb
Member
From: Austria
Registered: 2015-11-10
Posts: 584

Re: tower height

maro21 wrote:
Negreheb wrote:

I personally would just add the building:shape=pyramid.

There isn't such tag on OSM, it is used only 19 times.

And yet i used it 3 times and it works in osmbuildings.org and in f4map.com So why should he not use it? It is not wrong either. Specifically https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/49331920 and with https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=47.8117459& … hi=-42.112 and https://osmbuildings.org/?lat=47.81184& … otation=65

I might rework that building as a whole, but this part will stay because it is true.

EDIT: And, building:shape=* is used more often already. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ … ape#values here a link.

Last edited by Negreheb (2020-03-10 09:29:05)

Offline

#8 2020-03-10 18:03:10

pyram
Member
Registered: 2012-06-16
Posts: 1,318

Re: tower height

Negreheb wrote:

And yet i used it 3 times and it works in osmbuildings.org and in f4map.com So why should he not use it? It is not wrong either. Specifically https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/49331920 and with https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=47.8117459& … hi=-42.112 and https://osmbuildings.org/?lat=47.81184& … otation=65

For whatever reason it works - the correct Tag is roof:shape=pyramidal.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings

Offline

#9 2020-03-10 19:02:01

pyram
Member
Registered: 2012-06-16
Posts: 1,318

Re: tower height

maro21 wrote:

So no one has ever drawn a tower in 3D on OSM?

Many towers (e.g. city wall) are buildings ;-)

If you want to see a mast in detailed 3D, you have to invent an appropriate scheme and/or talk with the maintainer of the 3D-Renderer. Using building tags for https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dmast (or similar) is tagging for the renderer.

Offline

#10 2020-03-11 15:59:48

maro21
Member
From: Wrocław
Registered: 2018-03-06
Posts: 794

Re: tower height

Negreheb wrote:

And yet i used it 3 times and it works in osmbuildings.org and in f4map.com So why should he not use it? It is not wrong either. Specifically https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/49331920 and with https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=47.8117459& … hi=-42.112 and https://osmbuildings.org/?lat=47.81184& … otation=65

Oh, ok. But I think it will draw a pyramid, like in these examples, and my tower isn't a pyramid.

I don't want to draw anything in 3D, becasue it is already done with all the details. I just want to see the tower again in 3D, what should I do?

Offline

#11 2020-03-12 08:29:43

Negreheb
Member
From: Austria
Registered: 2015-11-10
Posts: 584

Re: tower height

Seems like its working in osmbuildings right now. For f4map - i would ask f4map, why they don't.

(Btw. i completely missed that the tower is tagged already completely and in detail for 3d. Just thought you want a easy solution so it looks a bit like. Thats why i suggested shape=pyramid)

Offline

#12 2020-03-12 14:13:44

maro21
Member
From: Wrocław
Registered: 2018-03-06
Posts: 794

Re: tower height

Maybe the elements should be grouped in a relation or something?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/479510854
Do "building:part"s need a relation type=building or [building=yes] to be visible?

Negreheb wrote:

i would ask f4map, why they don't.

Ok, thank you :) Let me know.

Offline

#13 2020-03-13 22:17:51

pyram
Member
Registered: 2012-06-16
Posts: 1,318

Re: tower height

maro21 wrote:

Do "building:part"s need a relation type=building or [building=yes] to be visible?

No.

Offline

#14 2020-04-14 10:45:25

Cactusbone
Member
Registered: 2013-06-11
Posts: 105

Re: tower height

maro21 wrote:

Do "building:part"s need a relation type=building or [building=yes] to be visible?

Yes they do ! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sim … g_outlines

However in this specific case i think this is a man_made=mast and not a building. so using building:part is indeed tagging "for the renderer" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag … e_renderer)

Maybe we should allow the use of "building:part" for man_made and sculture tags (for the gundam https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=35.6244167& … i=-24.637)

Any thoughts ?

Offline

#15 2020-04-19 14:00:13

pyram
Member
Registered: 2012-06-16
Posts: 1,318

Re: tower height

Cactusbone wrote:

Yes they do ! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sim … g_outlines

? See:

WIKI wrote:

...Otherwise, there is no need to create a type=building relation, i.e. simply position all building parts inside the building outline as described above. ...

Cactusbone wrote:

Maybe we should allow the use of "building:part" for man_made and sculture tags
...
Any thoughts ?

Sorry, but I think that's a bad idea.
Everyone who want to show only "real" buildings will get other stuff like that sculpture.

We could establish a own group of 3D-Elements like "3d:part=*" or "man_made:part=*" and you translate this in your source in "building:part=*" if you want to add it in a simply way.

Offline

#16 2020-04-19 16:31:16

Tordanik
Moderator
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-06-17
Posts: 2,686
Website

Re: tower height

Offering something like 3d:part=* is an interesting idea. There's a bit of a tendency for people map objects such as sculptures or bridge piers as buildings in order to be able to represent them with S3DB tagging. We probably want a solution for this that does not involve mapping for the renderer so that other data consumers aren't negatively affected.

Of course, I'm not sure if the prism-with-a-roof philosophy of S3DB is a good general-purpose 3D modelling approach for OSM – thoughts on that? (Something like the Gundam would arguably be more suited for the 3D Model Repository, but that hasn't taken off so far.)


OSM in 3D: OSM2World

Offline

#17 2020-04-26 09:55:33

Negreheb
Member
From: Austria
Registered: 2015-11-10
Posts: 584

Re: tower height

Because someone said building:shape=* is not valid - osmbuildings check for it. What shapes are supported? https://github.com/OSMBuildings/OSMBuil … -598308557

Part-quote

We do process building:shape like:

    cone
    dome
    pyramid (pyramidal accepted too)
    sphere (spherical accepted too)
    none (no building walls rendered, only roof)
    cylinder (cylindrical accepted too)

everything else would be simply extruded

Offline

#18 2020-04-28 17:25:46

Cactusbone
Member
Registered: 2013-06-11
Posts: 105

Re: tower height

maro21 wrote:

Do "building:part"s need a relation type=building or [building=yes] to be visible?

Yeah sorry, I answered too quickly, there's no need for a relation, but a [building=something] polygon is mandatory, and should contains all parts.

Offline

#19 2020-04-29 18:19:01

maro21
Member
From: Wrocław
Registered: 2018-03-06
Posts: 794

Re: tower height

Negreheb wrote:

Seems like its working in osmbuildings right now. For f4map - i would ask f4map, why they don't.

Did you ask them? What did they answer?

Cactusbone wrote:

there's no need for a relation, but a [building=something] polygon is mandatory, and should contains all parts.

What do you mean by "should contains all parts"?

Offline

#20 2020-05-19 09:13:33

Cactusbone
Member
Registered: 2013-06-11
Posts: 105

Re: tower height

What do you mean by "should contains all parts"?

All the building parts should be included (2d wise), as in overlap the geometry, of the outline (the polygon with building=something).

Did you ask them? What did they answer?

My guess is he meant for you to ask.

For now F4Map only loads parts for buildings, so if it's tagged man_made=tower, we're rendering only the outline up to the designated height.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB