On 17 January 2015 at 22:16, Friedrich Volkmann <b...@volki.at> wrote: > With the addrN schema, we need one object (a node tagged shop=* and > addrN:*=*) for a shop. > With the provides_feature relation we need one node for the shop, one node > for each address, and one relation.
And if there are two shops that both have the same address? Then your scheme breaks down as you would end up with a database with two distinct nodes but same address. Clearly a bad thing and against the principle of 'One feature - one element' http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element > The provides_feature relation may be fine for entrances and parking places, > but using it for addresses adds too much unnecessary complexity to the > database. I am not sure if the "address" role is bad, but we shouldn't use > it in cases where we can do without that relation. If there is a need to explicitly associate one or more addresses with a building I don't see any other coherent way. Shoehorning multiple address into single object just goes against how things are modelled in OSM /Markus _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
