Closed orangejulius closed 5 years ago
It would be great if we could include this too? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6137529
And this one too :) https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3573535
Maybe by targeting the tourism tag?
We already import both of those because we do look at the tourism tag.
After spending some time looking at the OSM wiki I think what we will miss without this PR is pedestrian squares that are not "major tourist attractions".
This one is actually tagged 'place:square' https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/131761
Oh interesting. Well, as usual OSM has many ways to do the same thing. According to taginfo there are only 22k places tagged place=square
but over 500k highway=pedestrian
. I don't see any harm in supporting both though.
Makes sense
There is one change to the fixture file which isn't ideal, it's a 'bus loop'.
Is that something we want? Would it be possible to avoid elements like that?
Good catch. I'm going to say that place is tagged incorrectly. It's definitely a bus stop and it should not have highway=pedestrian
at all. It won't affect our tests unless we update the included PBF file, but I'm going to fix it on OSM.
Makes sense, I think you're right
I added support for place=square
just to handle all the cases. Its so rare it doesn't even affect the output from the fixture PBF files.
Pedestrian squares are often well known places that are essentially venues. This change allows any OSM record with the tags
highway=pedestrian
,area=yes
, and a name to be imported as a venue.