Remove amenity and tourism not null from osm buildings extraction

[manjitapandey]

While extracting building features from osm, currently we use three parameters buildings not null, tourism not null and amenity not null.

I purpose to remove tourism and amenity and only add buildings not null while extracting features from osm.

Reason to remove: In FMTM when extracting the data extracts, In cases of amenity like schools and hospitals there are two polygons; one of actual building with building not null tag and another area of school or hospital where amenity is not null but building tag is null. Visualising both amenity and buildings in FMTM makes it difficult to select individual building sometimes. In such cases, its better to remove amenity and only use building not null tags.
Similar is the case for tourism, the parks and gardens also have tourism not null but buildings so using tourism not null provides inaccurate extracts. For the cases like hotels, both tourism and buildings are not null hence they will be included.

[spwoodcock]

Thanks for looking into it 😃

This was a decision originally by @robsavoye I think & I imagine there is probably a reason we use all three tags - he knows quite a lot about OSM data internals!

Sorry to ping you Rob, but are you able to shed any light on this? 🙏

[rsavoye]

That config file was originally created for my style of building mapping when out field mapping, and pre-dates FMTM by several years. :-) Many buildings are amenities, for example things like public toilets, which I map a lot of, which often have no building tag at all. Most of my building mapping these days is very small rural hamlets where most of the buildings, if any, aren't in OSM (yet). I'm not using data extracts for buildings most of the time as there aren't any to extract. As I don't use the version in osm-fieldwork anymore, feel free to change whatever you need to.

[manjitapandey]

Thanks @rsavoye for the clarification. Recently, I have been coming across multiple such cases where the amenities tag cause confusion to users. Like in case of multiple buildings in universities and hospitals, user often confuse whether to select individual building or whole amenity boundary. While in demographics kind of survey like census may use amenity boundary but the default form we use for buildings contains questions respective to building like building material.
Hence, I recommend adding one form category called amenities for such cases and remove amenities from buildings category.
cc: @Sujanadh

[rsavoye]

I was working on an Amenities XLSForm, which is in the archive directory, since I'm also updating those in small towns and not all the buildings. All the XLSForms were created before I was at HOT, so more for my style of mapping than what FMTM needs. Since I'm using my own version of both the amenities and building XLSForms for my OSM Merge project, feel free to make any changes you need to. It should be a separate XLSForm.