Hi
I understand that it is useful to use addr:place for neighborhoods,
hamlets, and isolated dwellings etc. But here, it is a quite regular
street address, just that the referenced feature is not a highway, but a
square (we could limit it to place=square). So why should this be ruled
out categorically? It does not read addr:highway, does it?
I think OSM Inspector should check that there is *some* entity close by
that matches the street name, to avoid spelling mistakes etc. In
another case, the street name actually references a park, e.g here
<http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresses&lon=7.61170&lat=47.55898&zoom=18&overlays=street_not_found>
So should I reference that with addr:park? Or map the park as a place,
or as a highway? Rather not, eh?
So I propose to be more flexible here. Too many "false positives" in
the QA tools are frustrating to the users, and shadow the real mistakes.
Regards
Johannes
Hi
I'd rather use addr:place="Square Name" in that case. In don't agree
that addr:place is 'intended for larger objects like "villages,
islands, territorial zones"'. I also use addr:place e.g. for
settlements (place=neighbourhood) or hamlets, if there is no street
with the addresses' name (example: [^1]).
[^1]:
<http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresses&lon=7.59448&lat=47.54290&zoom=18&overlays=buildings,buildings_with_addresses,postal_code,entrances_deprecated,entrances,no_addr_street,street_not_found,place_not_found,misformatted_housenumber,nodes_with_addresses_defined,nodes_with_addresses_interpolated,interpolation,interpolation_errors,connection_lines,nearest_points,nearest_roads,nearest_areas,addrx_on_nonclosed_way>
Regards
Markus
On Mon, 13 Aug 2018 at 21:05, Toggenburger Lukas
<Lukas.Toggenburger at htwchur.ch> wrote:
Hi
I'm the main author of the address view of Geofabrik's OSM inspector:
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresses , a QA tool for OSM, whose
sourcecode you can find at https://github.com/ltog/osmi-addresses/
Some time ago I received the following issue and subsequent pull request:
- https://github.com/ltog/osmi-addresses/issues/111
- https://github.com/ltog/osmi-addresses/pull/115
The submitter johsin18 proposes the following:
Given a (node|way) with addr:street=theName and a (node|way) with place=square, name=theName,
the first object should logically be tied to the second. Correspondingly, osmi-addresses should
recognize this and not display it as an error as it is currently the case, e.g. at:
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresses&lon=7.59448&lat=47.54290&zoom=18&overlays=buildings,buildings_with_addresses,postal_code,entrances_deprecated,entrances,no_addr_street,street_not_found,place_not_found,misformatted_housenumber,nodes_with_addresses_defined,nodes_with_addresses_interpolated,interpolation,interpolation_errors,connection_lines,nearest_points,nearest_roads,nearest_areas,addrx_on_nonclosed_way
osmi-addresses currently expects either
addr:street=* used in combination with highway=*, name=*
or
addr:place=* used in combination with place=*, name=*
Both myself and the current maintainer of osmi-addresses (=Nakaner) are unsure
if this proposed change would be appreciated by the larger public or not. We
are therefore seeking your opinion.
Best regards
Lukas
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
