Anthony wrote: > On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Tobias Knerr > <o...@tobias-knerr.de> wrote: > > My suggestion is to use a new interpolation value; something like > > interpolation=step + step=4 (step=2 would produce the same result as > > odd/even, depending on the house number it starts with; step=1 would > > have the same effect as all). > > I'd agree with that if the numbers 2, 6, 10, etc. were being reserved > for different lots. But in this example, the lots are really each > being assigned two numbers. > > Something which perhaps should be clarified is that Randy said that > "the large majority of housing is single family". Does this mean > that duplexes are disallowed in most areas, and you are only going to > use this scheme where duplexes are disallowed (and keep it up to date > as zoning changes and/or variances are granted)? Or does this mean > that most houses on a particular street are single family, and a few > here and there are duplexes? > > Either way, I would suggest that simply using an even/odd > interpolation is the better solution. In the former case, it saves > you from updating things every time there's a zoning change or > variance granted. And in the latter case, it's just plain the only > correct thing to do. > > As I said in my previous message, an interpolation explicitly omits > the number of houses. In my town we have plenty of blocks (especially > in commercial areas) with addressing like "1701, 1733, 1751, 1755". > > In fact, I'll give a real example from my town: 14802, 14602, 14502, > 14402, 14324, 14308, 14002.
I actually shouldn't have said that two addresses are assigned to the same lot. It's only assumption based on my observation that on blocks that contain duplexes, the addresses don't skip (except for the odd even skip) whereas on blocks with single family dwellings the skip is apparent. The skipping may, but probably doesn't, have anything to do with zoning. Where duplexes exist, there is no need to skip numbers, since both numbers on used on a single lot. Where single family dwellings exist the a number is skipped between "addressable entities". The intermediary addresses are not valid, because there is no building entrance to tie the address to. Of course, there are many places, mostly in commercial land-use areas that meet your example of widely and irregularly spaced numbers. I wouldn't attempt to use interpolation in such a situatation, but would either tag a building outline or a building node with the address. I am speaking of areas where the skip is orderly, regular, consistent (somewhat reduncant terms). -- Randy _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
