I like this new tag. I had proposing something like that on my TODO list.
I added it in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/96211869 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/96211869#map=17/50.07743/19.93381&layers=N> to mark addr:housenumber=1-3 as a single address, not a range (based on survey that I remember well) Dec 21, 2020, 19:05 by tagging@openstreetmap.org: > Okay. In this case I can rename to proposal page to "addr:range". > > This new tag: > > - applies to nodes and closed ways that have addr:housenumber > - "addr:range=n" means every nth house is counted in a range > - "addr:range=even/odd" means every even/odd house is counted > - "addr:range=all" means every house is counted (default value for a > housenumber tag with a hyphen in it if no range is given). > - "addr:range=no" means that the housenumber tag is NOT a range of values but > rather a single housenumber. > > "addr:range=all" is the default because that is what the wiki says and what > software like streetcomplete suggests. Many buildings with multiple > housenumbers are tagged like this. > > However, software can create different defaults for different countries. For > example, in the UK a hypenated address most probably means a range of > even/odd addresses (so "addr:range=2") > > What are your thoughts on this? > > Also, I had linked the talk-gb thread, which discusses how addr:interpolation > on closed ways and nodes is already standard. That is the problem with > suggesting a new tag. This proposal would now require informing multiple > mappers to switch up the taggong scheme. > > Thanks, > IpswichMapper > > -- > > > 21 Dec 2020, 15:19 by lon...@denofr.de: > >> 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 >> > >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
