On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 02:37:08PM +0100, ipswichmapper--- via Tagging wrote: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/addr:interpolation_on_closed_ways_and_nodes > > Quick proposal I just created to accept this form of tagging. This follows > from a discussion on the Talk-GB mailing list. > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-December/025553.html > > > Please comment if there are issues with accepting this form of tagging.
I dislike this kind of tagging to the point that I've refused to support it in Nominatim in the past. See https://github.com/osm-search/Nominatim/issues/565 for the full disucssion. The problem is that it makes the interpretation of addr:housenumber and addr:interpolation dependent on the presence of another tag. Note that addr:housenumber=40-48 can be a valid housenumber. Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/285077586 So to know if the tag needs to be interpreted as a single housenumber or as a housenumber range you need to check if the node/way has a addr:interpolation tag in addtion to the addr:housenumber tag. Similarly, a way with addr:interpolation needs to be processed in two different ways: If a addr:housenumber is present, then assume it's a building and parse the addr:housenumber tag to get the range. If no housenumber is on the way, assume it is a good old interpolation line and look at the housenumbers along the nodes of the way. I find this kind of double meaning for tagging confusing and error-prone. But I might be fighting wind mills here. Sarah _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
