Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 14:16, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > This falls flat in areas where the postal service ignores the ground truth > and invents their own addresses (similarly: postal ZIPs versus census > ZIPs). Rural routes are just one example of this. I'd be more willing to > say "What address wo

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 6:22 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > Building is the 'common' example. In cases where plots of land receive > things then the plot area should have the address. If there are many > buildings but only one address, where is the mail to be delivered ? Put the > address on that build

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Zip codes, in the USA, are the same way. They are intended for the post office's routing, and don't necessarily correspond to administrative divisions of the land. A given plot of land may be in one administrative division for tax purposes, yet be lumped into a neighboring division for mail-del

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 12:57 +0100, pmailkeey . wrote: > For some strange reason, RM chose settlements rather than counties to > determine postcodes. > They chose where the sorting offices were and from that where the lines of communication went, that is why Market Bosworth (a long way inside Le

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 11:43, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > > > On 2015-05-29 11:58, pmailkeey . wrote: > > > > On 29 May 2015 at 07:34, Colin Smale wrote: > > > >Only Royal Mail think Chepstow is in Gloucestershire, England. Normal >> people think it is in Monmouthshire, Wales. This is the correct

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 2015-05-29 11:58, pmailkeey . wrote: > On 29 May 2015 at 07:34, Colin Smale wrote: >> Only Royal Mail think Chepstow is in Gloucestershire, England. Normal people >> think it is in Monmouthshire, Wales. This is the correct postal address: >> >> 1 Bigstone Meadow >> Tutshill >> CHEPSTOW

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 10:56, Marc Gemis wrote: > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:33 AM, pmailkeey . > wrote: > >> Did you ever look at the example that I've send you ? (probably not >>> because it doesn't fit in your idea of addresses) >>> >> >> Probably ! >> >> >>> The house numbers are used to ident

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 07:34, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > Postcodes don't have addresses, but addresses can have postcodes. I say > "can have" and not "have" as addresses can exist without postcodes, for > example when the local authority has named the roads in a new estate but > the postcodes have not

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:33 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: > Did you ever look at the example that I've send you ? (probably not >> because it doesn't fit in your idea of addresses) >> > > Probably ! > > >> The house numbers are used to identity flats, not the building. >> > > Now you're confusing 'ho

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 07:18, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > That's a circular definition. What is the actual difference between the > two types of address, in your model? > > Only 1 type of address, just attached to a different type object. -- Mike. @millomweb

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 06:14, Marc Gemis wrote: > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:39 AM, pmailkeey . > wrote: > >> Addresses are used to identify buildings. Not all buildings need to be >> identified. > > > Did you ever look at the example that I've send you ? (probably not > because it doesn't fit in yo

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> > Depending on the country, state, area the address does not necessarily refer > to the building. > > In Australia the address refers to the property ie the plot of ground that is > defined by the cadastral plan. > > So those plots of ground may be 600 sq m or 1,000,000 hectares and may hav

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Postcodes don't have addresses, but addresses can have postcodes. I say "can have" and not "have" as addresses can exist without postcodes, for example when the local authority has named the roads in a new estate but the postcodes have not been allocated yet. You need to be able to talk about ad

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

That's a circular definition. What is the actual difference between the two types of address, in your model? On 2015-05-29 02:27, pmailkeey . wrote: > On 28 May 2015 at 08:24, Colin Smale wrote: > >> Mike, what's a "node address" and what's an "area address" (without >> resorting to circu

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:39 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: > Addresses are used to identify buildings. Not all buildings need to be > identified. Did you ever look at the example that I've send you ? (probably not because it doesn't fit in your idea of addresses) The house numbers are used to identit

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:39 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: > Mike. > 54.212404,-3.270514 >

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Hi Mike, Here's the entrance https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-15.91204/135.52593 There's nothing mapped there but if you look at bing imagery you can see where the access is. Here's the approximate centroid https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-15.5677/135.7972 Cheers Ross On 28/0

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 29 May 2015 at 01:50, Richard Welty wrote: > On 5/28/15 8:44 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > > Do explain > > first problem - "where google points" > > do you have any idea how many things are wrong with that statement? > > the two big ones: > > 1) we must not depend on anything google does > > 2)

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 5/28/15 8:44 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > Do explain > first problem - "where google points" do you have any idea how many things are wrong with that statement? the two big ones: 1) we must not depend on anything google does 2) google doesn't even reliably get it right so handwaving "where goog

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Do explain On 29 May 2015 at 01:39, Richard Welty wrote: > On 5/28/15 8:26 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > > > > > Postcodes don't have addresses! > > Where Google points, given that postcode, for a geographic address > > Bigstone Meadow > Tutshill > Nr Chepstow > Gloucestershire > England > >um

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 28 May 2015 at 09:49, Colin Smale wrote: > > > > Addresses are just labels, with (in the general case) an N:M relation with > "areas". Addresses are not used to identify buildings, as that would imply > that all buildings (even sheds and garages) would need their own address. > Addresses are

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 5/28/15 8:26 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > > > > Postcodes don't have addresses! > > Where Google points, given that postcode, for a geographic address > > Bigstone Meadow > Tutshill > Nr Chepstow > Gloucestershire > England > ummm, i think you have quite a bit to learn about geocoding. richard --

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 28 May 2015 at 08:24, Colin Smale wrote: > Mike, what's a "node address" and what's an "area address" (without > resorting to circular definitions)? I have never seen a flag for this in > any of the many address databases I have worked with. > > Address on a node and address on an area !

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 28 May 2015 at 07:32, Colin Smale wrote: > In the UK we have postal addresses which are for Royal Mail's convenience, > not yours. Often your (correct) postal address suggests you are in a > different town, and sometimes even a different country. > > What would you call the geographic address

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Also, large industrial facilities may have all mail delivered to a central office, yet have separate street addresses for individual buildings for delivering goods. On May 28, 2015 9:21:44 AM "Colin Smale" wrote: In the UK we have postal addresses which are for Royal Mail's convenience, no

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 2015-05-28 12:24, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2015-05-28 12:12 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale : > >> If you have a block of flats with 2000 people apparently living at the same >> address, I can't imagine that a single, shared letter box will be enough. >> Each apartment will have its own addres

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

2015-05-28 12:12 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale : > If you have a block of flats with 2000 people apparently living at the > same address, I can't imagine that a single, shared letter box will be > enough. Each apartment will have its own address. > > Or are you talking about where each apartment has its o

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 2015-05-28 11:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2015-05-28 10:49 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale : > >> Addresses are just labels, with (in the general case) an N:M relation with >> "areas". Addresses are not used to identify buildings, as that would imply >> that all buildings (even sheds and gara

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

2015-05-28 10:49 GMT+02:00 Colin Smale : > Addresses are just labels, with (in the general case) an N:M relation with > "areas". Addresses are not used to identify buildings, as that would imply > that all buildings (even sheds and garages) would need their own address. > actually in Italy garag

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Addresses are just labels, with (in the general case) an N:M relation with "areas". Addresses are not used to identify buildings, as that would imply that all buildings (even sheds and garages) would need their own address. In multi-occupancy buildings (apartments, shared offices etc) each separ

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 28.05.2015 um 09:24 schrieb Colin Smale : > > Mike, what's a "node address" and what's an "area address" (without resorting > to circular definitions)? I have never seen a flag for this in any of the > many address databases I have worked with. > have you dealt with international add

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Mike, what's a "node address" and what's an "area address" (without resorting to circular definitions)? I have never seen a flag for this in any of the many address databases I have worked with. On 2015-05-28 02:04, pmailkeey . wrote: > On 28 May 2015 at 00:39, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: >

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

In the UK we have postal addresses which are for Royal Mail's convenience, not yours. Often your (correct) postal address suggests you are in a different town, and sometimes even a different country. What would you call the geographic address for NP16 7JU? The postal address is Chepstow. It's not

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 28 May 2015 at 00:39, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:22 AM, pmailkeey . > wrote: > > > > In the US where there are mailboxes with the little flags on them it > seems correct to put the address on the node for that box. Common sense > really. > > Mike, you keep on insis

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:22 AM, pmailkeey . wrote: > > In the US where there are mailboxes with the little flags on them it seems > correct to put the address on the node for that box. Common sense really. Mike, you keep on insisting that addresses should always be put on an area and never on a

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 08:48, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > > Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > > > > Also, the address must be unique > > > why? > > Otherwise high risk of computer crashing Mike. @millomweb - For

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 08:07, Colin Smale wrote: > Martin et al., > > It might help to have some kind of paradigm here as I think our frames of > reference may be divergent. If we don't have consensus about the "question" > we will never agree about the "answer" except by coincidence, and that > woul

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 01:00, Ross wrote: > Your still missing the point. > > Depending on the country, state, area the address does not necessarily > refer to the building. > > In Australia the address refers to the property ie the plot of ground that > is defined by the cadastral plan. > > So those

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 10:48, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2015-05-27 10:38 GMT+02:00 Markus Lindholm : >> >> On 27 May 2015 at 09:48, Martin Koppenhoefer >> wrote: >> >> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : >> >> Also, the address must be unique >> > why? >> >> Otherwise they make bad

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 27.05.2015 um 11:59 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > Using that logic the address should be on a node at the main visitor entry > ... only visitors will need that level of detail .. regulars will make their > own way once in close proximity. no, because there are other useca

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Don't know if this can happen in the Australian model, but there may be multiple "visitor entrances" which are true alternatives (i.e. not one main plus one side entrance). I would hope the routing would pick the most appropriate entrance, given an ultimate destination in the middle somewhere an

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27/05/2015 7:33 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-05-27 11:03 GMT+02:00 Ross >: But if you tagged it on the 1,000,000 hectare property and it was then displayed at the centroid you'd never find the access to the property as it's centroid is not even

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

2015-05-27 11:03 GMT+02:00 Ross : > But if you tagged it on the 1,000,000 hectare property and it was then > displayed at the centroid you'd never find the access to the property as > it's centroid is not even close to the road where the address is. Yes, but more intelligent software could see

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Markus Lindholm wrote: > Otherwise they make bad routing targets Complete addresses may indeed be unique, but the "housenumber" part can be and is in may countries the same for, for example all apartments in an apartment building. In other countries each apartmen

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

But if you tagged it on the 1,000,000 hectare property and it was then displayed at the centroid you'd never find the access to the property as it's centroid is not even close to the road where the address is. The entrance is here: http://binged.it/1Rn0nOY but the centroid is about here: ht

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

2015-05-27 10:38 GMT+02:00 Markus Lindholm : > On 27 May 2015 at 09:48, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > >> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > >> Also, the address must be unique > > why? > > Otherwise they make bad routing targets Maybe for ideal routing, an address is someti

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 09:48, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : >> Also, the address must be unique > why? Otherwise they make bad routing targets /Markus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org htt

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

A block of flats will also have many addresses. Each individual apartment will have its own. If there is a garage down the street which is part of the "property" of the flat, you could say that the garage is also part of the address. Things can get very messy... Depending on the definition you

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27/05/2015 09:57, Daniel Koć wrote: W dniu 27.05.2015 9:38, Jean-Marc Liotier napisał(a): Also, the address must be unique - it must not be present on more than one object, even if more than one POI exists at that address. So there are exceptions to this rule: I know at least one example whe

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27/05/2015 09:47, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : Absent any information, tagging the plot is better than nothing. A building is better - and even better is the main entrance or an even finer scheme to separate entrance and postbox. By using an

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

W dniu 27.05.2015 9:38, Jean-Marc Liotier napisał(a): Also, the address must be unique - it must not be present on more than one object, even if more than one POI exists at that address. So there are exceptions to this rule: I know at least one example where the same address is given for two

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > > Also, the address must be unique why? Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:38 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > > Absent any information, tagging the plot is better than nothing. A building > is better - and even better is the main entrance or an even finer scheme to > separate entrance and postbox. if you add an address that belongs to a plot t

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27/05/2015 09:07, Colin Smale wrote: What are the use cases for an "address"? Is it as a routing target? A "label" or "annotation" for a building? or a "property" in a looser sense? Is it for the benefit of the postman? Or what? As Christian Quest explained on talk-fr just minutes ago, an a

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 27.05.2015 um 09:07 schrieb Colin Smale : > > What are the use cases for an "address"? Is it as a routing target? A "label" > or "annotation" for a building? or a "property" in a looser sense? Is it for > the benefit of the postman? Or what? it is a property of some other object it re

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Martin et al., It might help to have some kind of paradigm here as I think our frames of reference may be divergent. If we don't have consensus about the "question" we will never agree about the "answer" except by coincidence, and that would be the worst situation of all. What are the use ca

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 27.05.2015 um 02:00 schrieb Ross : > > In Australia the address refers to the property ie the plot of ground that is > defined by the cadastral plan. > > So those plots of ground may be 600 sq m or 1,000,000 hectares and may have > zero, one or many buildings. generally it will be m

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

If a building is all one address, I see no reason not to tag the building outline. If there are multiple addresses, then nodes are a good way to go. Both schemes are in use. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.o

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Your still missing the point. Depending on the country, state, area the address does not necessarily refer to the building. In Australia the address refers to the property ie the plot of ground that is defined by the cadastral plan. So those plots of ground may be 600 sq m or 1,000,000 hec

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 5/26/15 6:56 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > > Building addresses shouldn't be on nodes. Named entrances can be - on > ent/exit nodes. > if building addresses shouldn't be on nodes, what are we to make of the address interpolation feature? richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 27 May 2015 at 00:06, Colin Smale wrote: > Mike, you are missing the point... A building and an address are two > different things. A building may have 0 to N addresses. An address may or > may not refer to a building. The "business rules" to link the two concepts > vary by country. An addres

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Mike, you are missing the point... A building and an address are two different things. A building may have 0 to N addresses. An address may or may not refer to a building. The "business rules" to link the two concepts vary by country. An address is not usually a unique identifier of a building -

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 26 May 2015 at 09:11, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > > Am 25.05.2015 um 17:53 schrieb pmailkeey . : > > > > CONGRATULATIONS ! You win the award for the best puzzle of the year! It > appears to be a loose numbering system for identifying entrances rather > than properties. > > > that's wh

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 26/05/2015 6:11 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am 25.05.2015 um 17:53 schrieb pmailkeey . : CONGRATULATIONS ! You win the award for the best puzzle of the year! It appears to be a loose numbering system for identifying entrances rather than properties. that's what I told you initially,

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 25.05.2015 um 17:53 schrieb pmailkeey . : > > CONGRATULATIONS ! You win the award for the best puzzle of the year! It > appears to be a loose numbering system for identifying entrances rather than > properties. that's what I told you initially, you said tagging a node would be "wrong"

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 25 May 2015 at 09:14, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2015-05-23 1:56 GMT+02:00 pmailkeey . : > >> have a look at these housenumbers, they're 5 and 7 for this side of the >>> building (one big hotel), but the main address is from the main street >>> (front of the buikding) and is different. >>>

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

2015-05-23 1:56 GMT+02:00 pmailkeey . : > have a look at these housenumbers, they're 5 and 7 for this side of the >> building (one big hotel), but the main address is from the main street >> (front of the buikding) and is different. >> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/attachmen

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21/05/15 20:16, pmailkeey . wrote: On 21 May 2015 at 02:08, Ross > wrote: On 21/05/15 09:51, pmailkeey . wrote: On 20 May 2015 at 14:10, André Pirard mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi, We know that addr:housenumber

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 22 May 2015 at 07:35, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > > Am 21.05.2015 um 23:53 schrieb pmailkeey . : > > > > Tag the building with street address and add an ent/exit node to mark > the entrance. > > > have a look at these housenumbers, they're 5 and 7 for this side of the > building (one

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

> Am 21.05.2015 um 23:53 schrieb pmailkeey . : > > Tag the building with street address and add an ent/exit node to mark the > entrance. have a look at these housenumbers, they're 5 and 7 for this side of the building (one big hotel), but the main address is from the main street (front of

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21/05/2015 7:30 PM, André Pirard wrote: An amenity is not an object, it's an attribute of an object like a building. Objects? (note pun) amenity=bbq amenity=atm amenity=fountain amenity=bench amenity=clock amenity=photo_booth amenity=post_box etc... ___

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21 May 2015 at 18:40, Chris Fleming wrote: > Fundamentally, there isn't a single answer to this problem. The answer we > have developed in Edinburgh is to place a node on the building where the > entrance is, this is largely because a single building will Costa n many > door as well as shops e

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21 May 2015 at 15:28, Ross wrote: > > > On 21/05/15 20:16, pmailkeey . wrote: > > > > On 21 May 2015 at 02:08, Ross wrote: > >> >> >> On 21/05/15 09:51, pmailkeey . wrote: >> >> >> >> On 20 May 2015 at 14:10, André Pirard wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> We know that addr:housenumber >>>

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21 May 2015 at 14:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > > Am 21.05.2015 um 01:51 schrieb pmailkeey . : > > We know that addr:housenumber >> =* can be tagged on nodes >> and >> that

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Fundamentally, there isn't a single answer to this problem. The answer we have developed in Edinburgh is to place a node on the building where the entrance is, this is largely because a single building will Costa n many door as well as shops etc. Shops are added as nodes set back I not the building

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21/05/15 20:16, pmailkeey . wrote: On 21 May 2015 at 02:08, Ross > wrote: On 21/05/15 09:51, pmailkeey . wrote: On 20 May 2015 at 14:10, André Pirard mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi, We know that addr:housenumber

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 2015-05-21 12:16, pmailkeey . wrote : On 21 May 2015 at 02:08, Ross wrote: On 21/05/15 09:51, pmailkeey . wrote:

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Am 21.05.2015 um 01:51 schrieb pmailkeey . : >> We know that addr:housenumber=* can be tagged on nodes and that it's very >> convenient. > > But wrong. what/where do you refer to? Is it wrong where you are? Typically inferring from your own experience to every other possible place on ear

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

If I followed it correctly, also in the Netherlands all addresses are mapped on nodes, which they lined up diagonally inside the building contours, for buildings with more than 1 address. Since they have all the data out in the open, they could import it, of course, which means they now have a com

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

There are apartment buildings where each apartment has a different house number, (and no, they are not unit or apartment numbers and yes 2 floors with different apartments). [1] Many discussions on the different OSM lists and fora have showed that in different countries 1 building can have multipl

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 2015-05-21 11:33, Marc Gemis wrote : > > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:13 AM, André Pirard > mailto:a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Info is routinely in two places, e.g. building and > associatedStreet, to cope with software or people that do not > support one of the places. > > >

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, pmailkeey . wrote: > Another major OSM bug ! Buildings should have no more data than > name/number with regard to addressing as all the rest of the address should > be available elsewhere. Easy to explain: editors ask the complete address information, including

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21 May 2015 at 11:22, Marc Gemis wrote: > Be careful in which country you do this, never do this in Denmark e.g. [1] > How do you deal with buildings with multiple addresses ? Or does not not > exist in your part of the world (honest question) ? > > regards > > [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.or

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 2015-05-21 12:24, pmailkeey . wrote : On 21 May 2015 at 10:13, André Pirard wrote: On 2015-05-21 01:51, pmailkeey . wrote :

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Info is routinely in two places, e.g. building and associatedStreet, to cope with software or people that do not support one of the places. But that should not happen. If you have the realtion there should not be a addr:street tag on the building. Which is why some time ago we also had a lot

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21 May 2015 at 10:13, André Pirard wrote: > On 2015-05-21 01:51, pmailkeey . wrote : > > > Info shouldn't be duplicated or triplicated either. > > Please be clear and justify. > Info is routinely in two places, e.g. building and associatedStreet, to > cope with software or people that do no

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

Be careful in which country you do this, never do this in Denmark e.g. [1] How do you deal with buildings with multiple addresses ? Or does not not exist in your part of the world (honest question) ? regards [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses#Denmark On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:16

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21 May 2015 at 02:08, Ross wrote: > > > On 21/05/15 09:51, pmailkeey . wrote: > > > > On 20 May 2015 at 14:10, André Pirard wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> We know that addr:housenumber >> =* can be tagged on nodes >>

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

W dniu 21.05.2015 11:30, André Pirard napisał(a): An amenity is not an object, it's an attribute of an object like a building. That would be more true for building=school probably (building with the attribute of being suitable for school use) - things are very complicated under the surface.

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

In general, there is a many-to-many relationship between buildings and addresses. Within one building, amenities/enterprises may each have their own address. An address may also refer to multiple buildings. //colin On 2015-05-21 11:30, André Pirard wrote: > On 2015-05-20 19:26, Andreas Gos

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:30 AM, André Pirard wrote: > The wiki states that the address of an area can be tagged on one of its > nodes. typically the entrance node. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/li

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:13 AM, André Pirard wrote: > Info is routinely in two places, e.g. building and associatedStreet, to > cope with software or people that do not support one of the places. > that depends, some people use associatedStreet only to associate a building with a street. They

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 2015-05-20 19:26, Andreas Goss wrote : >> That is the same number both on a node (once) and on the way/relation >> *that this node belongs to* (once)? > > Do you mean area when you say way? I think if a building has the > address then you should not have a node for just the address. If it's > a

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 2015-05-21 01:51, pmailkeey . wrote : > > > On 20 May 2015 at 14:10, André Pirard > wrote: > > Hi, > > We know that addr:housenumber > =* can be tagged on > nodes >

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 21/05/15 09:51, pmailkeey . wrote: On 20 May 2015 at 14:10, André Pirard > wrote: Hi, We know that addr:housenumber =* can be tagged on nodes

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

On 20 May 2015 at 14:10, André Pirard wrote: > Hi, > > We know that addr:housenumber > =* can be tagged on nodes > and > that it's very convenient. > But wrong. > A problem in tag

Re: [Tagging] housenumber on node and area

That is the same number both on a node (once) and on the way/relation *that this node belongs to* (once)? Do you mean area when you say way? I think if a building has the address then you should not have a node for just the address. If it's a amenity, craft etc. then it's fine to put the addre