Hi, because it is mostly useless as it is already in the changeset information. For further information useful for mappers, there is the "note"=* tag.

Kind regards, Anakil

Hello, a commen not related to the mappjng feature, but i see in the source that you use maxar imagery. It is generally recommended to use the regional imagery in Belgium as the other are often of worse quality and especially often out of date. In Wallonia, it is the "SPW imagery most imagery" layer with 0.25 cm resolution and dating of last year at the moment. You also have the 'plan' data named PICC that often allow good building shape... If needed but it might not be up to date as it is on a rolling release municipality by municipality). In flanders, you have another regional imagery and Brussels too and they are of this year with very high accuracy for Brussels. It should be automatically proposed in JOSM anyway. :p

Happy mapping,
Anakil
Member of OpenStreetMap Belgium

On the ground it doesn't seem to be production site (to me a production site is an industrial plant like you have for Solvay in La Hulpe or near big harbour like Dunlerque...). From the one I know, it is only R&D happening there as it is linked to the university in Louvain-la-Neuve. I don't know of an intermediate tag between office and man_made=works for labs used during R&D...

There is not really a tag for the company parcel, because we generally don't tag parcels in OSM for many reasons including the fact that it can change quickly and it is not verifiable on the ground (see a list of these reasons on the wiki osm.wiki/Parcel). The only case i saw where we map an area in a commercial park, is for sub-division that are named differently that the main "park". Like for "Parc Monnet" (also in LLN) and one of the sub area is "Monnet Center" which include multiple buildings with multiple companies. It is like a commercial park inside a commercial park, so there we generally creating a second area with the same landuse=* tag but with different name. It is not really recommended but sometimes it can be a way to map it (until someone find a better scheme for it ;-) ).

For companies, what i would do myself is :
- I would map the company names and information on a node or the main building for each one of them. In that case, we can use the "office=company" (or any office=* tag) + name=* if that's an office (osm.wiki/Key:office). You can also have other type of place, but i don't think they would fit in this case as it is mostly offices and labs (at least i think so ;p). It could sometimes also be a shop or a craft (artisinal production), and if so you can use the related tag (you have a similar list of value for shop=* or craft=* on the wiki).
For real industrial places (here there is none of that), the landuse=industrial + industrial=* subtag should help and maybe man_made=works or other for matching sites (see more on the wiki ! Like the list of industrial subtag osm.wiki/Key:industrial).
- Secondly, i would map the details like fences, hedges, grass area, trees, ... in the area. And generally that should be enough to identify the area on the map very well.

These two steps would at least be verifiable on the ground, and well represent the reality.

Kind Regards

Hello xogalla,

I have a question : is there a particular reason to have put these man_made=works on some of these sites ? Being from the area, I wouldn't qualify these sites as industrial ground or factory but more labs and office. They don't produce a lot of stuff here (at least from what i know). But maybe you have another source ?! ^_^

Happy mapping,

Bonjour,

Merci de ta contributions ! Je vais juste critiquer le choix du tag (ou attribut) pour les entreprises. En effet, landuse=retail n'est pas adapté à cela car cela décrit l'utilisation du sol (qui n'est d'ailleurs pas un magasin je crois). Pour l'entreprise même, soit tu peux principalement utiliser office=* (une des valeurs pour un bureau), shop=* (une des valeurs pour un magasin) ou craft=* (une des valeurs pour un travail artisanal). ici j'imagine que Wood Side Story serait mieux décrit comme un "menuisier" (craft=joiner en anglais) et Chassis isolant comme "constructeur de fenêtre" (craft=window_construction) ?! Bref, je les ai mis comme cela à priori sur ce que j'ai vu de leur activité.

Aussi, si tu veux voir leur nom sur la carte, sache que la carte du site web n'est qu'une possibilité de rendu et ne montre absolument pas tout. Si besoin, il y a la possibilité de passer par une visualisation personnalisée et simple (par exemple via le service umap (https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/) qui permet d'intégrer dans un site web (ou via un lien) une carte interactive sur laquelle on peut ajouter des points/lignes… cliquables et qui peuvent afficher un pop-up (un peu comme sur google map si on veut).:-)

Bien à toi,
Anakil
Membre d'OpenStreetMap Belgium

Hi querrix, do you mean by "88/88A" that the house have two number or is it one number that is written like that (both are possible so i ask ;-) ) ? Because if it is two number, the usual way is to remove the housenumber from the house and put two node with each one the address (a node with 88 and a node with 88A) inside the building polygon or at the entrance location if known.

Also when changing the name of a street like the Rue de Royenne, don't forget to correct the addresses on the house if linked to this street (for example the 82, 72 nd 68 are now using the wrong street in the address). I corrected it. ;-)

Note that here, the administrative boundary is on the street and the name of the street is different on each side (in Grez-Doiceau it is Rue de Royenne (on the left) like you edited, but in Chaumont-Gistoux it is Chemin de Royenne (on the right) - i edited it to show how we do it if you didn't know yet, you can take a look. I never saw that it was the case here, so thanks to allow to spot it ! ^_^

Happy mapping,
Anakil

Hi Ancuetas,

Tout d'abord, Merci de ta contribution. J'ai juste une question : y a-t-il une raison pour avoir changer la géométrie du bâtiment de ce qui semblait être plus proche de la réalité ? Du moins, si je me base sur l'imagerie récente et sur les données "plan" de la région wallonne (PICC) -> On peut d'ailleurs sélectionner cette arrière-plan dans l'éditeur en cliquant sur le bouton en forme de "feuille de papier superposée" à droite et sélectionnant "PICC". En effet, le bâtiment n'a pas l'air d'être parfaitement à angle droit, mais peut-être que cela a changé récemment ?

Happy mapping,
Anakil

Bonjour,

Ça donne déjà quelque chose de pas mal. :-)
J'ai juste corrigé deux endroits où tu avais tracé deux fois le chemins (superposés l'un sur l'autre). Sinon c'est nickel ! ;-)

It is always good to have another point of view on these kind of things, so thank you for the detailed answer !

I tagged this for all the historic farm that are "good-looking" and worth to see when walking - these are very typic squared farms from this area - (even if we can't visit them). For sure, i may have used it too often ! But I didn't know of another tag to say "it's worth a look when you walk around there". ^_^

Only two of these are regularly visitable (but it is not always obvious) or on the regional tourism map, as far as i know. They are more known from local people and historian.. and i'm a fan of the historical and heritage things, so i'm not objective on that. ahah

Once again, thank for the advices.

Hi,
Just a quick question, do you have a good definition of what is a tourism=attraction in OSM ?

Because, if it is just something that can be interesting for tourist (like the wiki suggest), these site are nearly all on the local municipality "tourism" webpage. Does it qualify as an attraction for that ? I though it was enough but i may be wrong. ^_^

Thanks in advance for your insight,
Anakil

Also, don't map for the renderer, if it doesn't appear exactly as you though, it can be due to the renderer choice (like here in the mapnik style (of openstreetmap.org), the pedestrian area is always rendered above everything).

Hi,

Thank you for your contribution, i saw that you added a node with the exact same tag than on the area, it is not necessary (the palyground can be tagged on a node when you don't know the exact boundary - but in this case it is known as you have drawn the sandpit exactly !).

Also why do you remove details in the boundary of the sandpit ? I suppose it is because you use older imagery like bing (potlach 2 don't have access to the recent imagery in Wallonia i think). Please note that we have a 0.25 m imagery and plan data now and it can be draw with much more accuracy ! ;-)

Happy mapping,
Anakil
Member of the Belgium OSM community

Bonjour Tbj,

J'ai une petite question sur ta contribution ici : Y a-t-il une raison pour laquelle tu as déconnectée le bout de la rue d'En Haut et le sentier du bois ? C'est un vrai carrefour (j'y passe régulièrement les week-end) et contrairement à ce que la PICC indique, la route ne "tourne" pas vraiment comme ça. Je l'ai reconnecté en attendant. ^_^

Par ailleurs, il ne faut pas faire une confiance aveugle au PICC, ils peuvent se tromper surtout que dans les communes où cela fait longtemps qu'ils ont mis à jour (ici cela fait parfois 5-6 ans). Les sentiers et chemins peuvent avoir changer beaucoup depuis lors. Tu peux aussi t'inspirer d'une autre couche de fond de carte au lieu du PICC ou de l'imagerie, utile surtout dans le cas des zones boisées : le "SPW shaded relief" qui montre le relief et souvent permet d'identifier les sentiers forestiers (car ils sont encaissés). :-)

Happy mapping,
Anakil

Bonjour,

Merci de ta contribution, j'ai une petite proposition pour améliorer tes prochaines contributions : Quand tu traces des maisons ou bâtiments, je te conseille d'utiliser la couche de fond de carte du "PICC (Plan informatique de Cartographie Continue)" fournie par la région wallonne. Tu peux changer le fond de carte dans l'éditeur en cliquant sur le bouton en forme de feuille empilée à droite et en choisissant "PICC" (ou "SPW most recent imagery" pour revenir à la vue satellite). Le PICC a l'avantage d'être un plan qui comprend une grande partie des bâtiments avec une grande précision ! ;-)

Aussi, il est conseillé d'orthogonaliser les bâtiments une fois tracés (sauf bien sur si le bâtiment n'est pas constitué d'angles droits !). Pour se faire, tu peux clic droit sur le bâtiment que tu viens de tracer et cliquer sur le bouton représentant un carré ("orthogonaliser" -> Raccourci "Q" par défaut). Cela rend mieux et est souvent plus réaliste.

Une autre petite astuce qui peut te faire gagner du temps est qu'il n'est pas obligatoire d'indiquer la commune (ou ville) et le code postal car ceux-ci sont déjà inférés dans limites administratives existantes dans les environs. Ce n'est pas faux, mais c'est juste optionnel ! Donc, tu peux n'indiquer que la rue et le numéro de maison c'est suffisant. :-)

Attention aussi aux attributs que tu as mis, tu avais noté "appartement" sur l'école de Tourinnes (j'ai corrigé). ;-)
A noter que dans OSM, la classification d'un bâtiment résidentiel est plus "générale" que "maison" ou "appartement" (ces deux derniers sont tout deux des bâtiments résidentiels et ces attributs donne alors plus d'informations).

Au sinon, si tu as des questions ou envie de discuter avec la communauté OpenStreetMap belge, tu peux nous joindre via un des canaux suivants : https://openstreetmap.be/fr/contact.html (je conseille l'email ou le chat "Riot" car ce sont les canaux les plus réactifs !).

Happy mapping,
Anakil
Membre d'OpenStreetMap Belgium

Hello,

Thanks for your contributions in the area ! A small remark, we don't tag the cycleway separate of the road when it is on the side of the road (it is already tagged on the highway itself via "cycleway:left=lane"). We only tag the cycleway separately when they have a physical separation like a grass area between the road and the cycleway. :-)

Happy mapping !
Anakil
OpenStreetmap Belgium community

No real problem for me (that's a minor problem so take your time) ! Always great to see someone from another country community. ^_^

Our belgian convention is to follow the wiki on the tracktype (i.e. use it only for tracks). Our rural road are generally pretty simple : if there are some dirt, it is a track if drivable by agricultural vehicle or otherwise if not possible for a vehicle, it is generally a path.

Around here, normally all road that are for car have as surface : cobblestone, concrete or asphalt. The only exception is some driveway and service road (private generally). Otherwise it should generally be a track or a path as described above.

About surface, in the area, we often use the "cobblestone" for classic pavé, the paving_stone for stone really squared/rectangle - which are nearly only used in pedestrian area, footway and service road (like the one on the picture in the wiki), and the sett is pretty rare around here (even if it should maybe be more used - but we find it not really that different than cobblestone).

But indeed, there is always a personal choice in the word used (as often it is not exactly as the definition :p). I was just not used to see paving_stone on other thing than pedestrian, footway or service road. ;-)

Bonjour Sembola,

Un petit détail : Les attributs "tracktype" (grade1, grade2,...) ne doivent s'appliquer qu'à des types de routes forestiers ou agricoles ("highway"="track") ! Voir sur le wiki : osm.wiki/FR:Key:tracktype?uselang=fr

Aussi, je vois que tu as utilisés pas mal de fois les surfaces de type "paving_stones" et je crois que cela ne correspond pas à ce que tu pensais, ce sont en fait ce que l'on appelle souvent des "klinkers" en Wallonie (ou autre type de pavement de ce genre) généralement trouvé sur les routes piétonnes ! ;-) J'imagine que tu voulais indiquer des pa vés ? En anglais, c'est "cobblestone". Voir encore une fois le wiki (il y a des photos): osm.wiki/FR:Key:surface

Bien à toi,
Happy mapping ! :-)

Thanks for the reply. We don't have any automated process for spatial relation for street (only for postal code , city, country.... Where a boundary relation exist). That's why the street + house number are the only mandatory things. See on the wiki page : osm.wiki/Key:addr

But yes otherwise that's better to not put too many un-neccessary tags indeed. :-p

Hello,
One small thing, don't forget to add the street on the building when you add the housenumber. So the address is complete and usable. ^_^

Thanks and Happy mapping !