Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[stevea]

Nicely answered, I appreciate that!
SteveA

> On Nov 8, 2019, at 4:02 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> sent from a phone
> 
>> On 9. Nov 2019, at 00:48, stevea  wrote:
>> 
>> I wouldn't say "all" addresses, as Facebook isn't "all" of us.  
> 
> 
> of course, I apologize if this came along like a campaign just with facebook, 
> it was just an example that facebook was mentioned, because they are our 
> biggest data user (Apple as well, but they don’t use OpenStreetMap data in 
> their most  important markets, AFAIK). Collecting _all_ addresses is a 
> project goal (it’s part of mapping the whole world), and was not referring 
> specifically to facebook, nor had I imagined a campaign just with facebook 
> (if they are interested in this anyway), making such an announcement could be 
> an occasion for the media in general for featuring OpenStreetMap. The people 
> vs. Big Tech etc.
> 
> Cheers Martin


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 9. Nov 2019, at 00:48, stevea  wrote:
> 
> I wouldn't say "all" addresses, as Facebook isn't "all" of us.  


of course, I apologize if this came along like a campaign just with facebook, 
it was just an example that facebook was mentioned, because they are our 
biggest data user (Apple as well, but they don’t use OpenStreetMap data in 
their most  important markets, AFAIK). Collecting _all_ addresses is a project 
goal (it’s part of mapping the whole world), and was not referring specifically 
to facebook, nor had I imagined a campaign just with facebook (if they are 
interested in this anyway), making such an announcement could be an occasion 
for the media in general for featuring OpenStreetMap. The people vs. Big Tech 
etc.

Cheers Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[stevea]

I wouldn't say "all" addresses, as Facebook isn't "all" of us.  Also, it's an 
ambition, a gleam in a collective eye, a vision, something ahead in the future 
as a goal.  There will be, rightly, many paths to get there, rather than a 
single one.  This is true of any major goal in OSM.

SteveA

> On Nov 8, 2019, at 3:44 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> We could announce a campaign, “citizen mapping project collects all the 
> addresses in the world and provides them freely to everybody” or similar.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 8. Nov 2019, at 13:59, Simon Poole  wrote:
> 
> Just imagine that we increase the number of new OSM contributors by an
> order of magnitude, to ~2'000'000 per year, and just as magically we get
> them to make the single edit they typically make to be adding an
> address


imagine every facebook user would put their home address, or every business 
owner their business address. To make this happen, the procedure must be dead 
simple, and not require you understand an editor, or use a complex website with 
bells and whistles, but so overwhelming to my grand aunt that she will close 
the page as soon as she finds the button to do so.

We could announce a campaign, “citizen mapping project collects all the 
addresses in the world and provides them freely to everybody” or similar.

Cheers Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[marc marc]

Simon Poole:
>> how can the new contributor wishing to add an address find this tool?

> That doesn't make the slightest difference, because the only people
> adding addresses in any meaningful way are those 1% of contributors.

it's the problem of the egg and the chicken :
if effective tools were accessible to 2% 3% 10% of contributors,
then the speed would be multiplied by 2, 3 or 10

A more effective contribution would be to consider 3 types
of location/contributor:

- those where the opendata is of quality: we should talk about import

- those where the opendata exists but where the import has not been 
accepted and/or not yet done and/or new address exist: the "normal" 
contributor (99%) should be able to easily access the opendata in
an editor and validate in one click if it is correct. or correct
the position easily. osmose opendata-fork allow that but it'sn't
a editor that newbies find when surfing on osm.org.
and only a very few location are listed for addr.

- those where the opendata does not exist: a drop-down list
to avoid having to rewrite the street name is a minimum.
It also avoid typo and letter case.

Thinking about the time spent on the addresses I added,
I think I could have been much more efficient for both those
added by survey and those from opendata.
so by spending the same amount of time on it, I could have added
a lot more. And it would have been much more motivating to do it
often.

Regards,
Marc
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Simon Poole]

Am 08.11.2019 um 13:19 schrieb marc marc:
> Hello,
>
> Simon Poole :
>> The issue with addresses is definitely not due to a lack of tools 
>> for OSM contributors. For example
>> https://regio-osm.de/hausnummerauswertung/anzeige_dynamisch.html?land=Schweiz=8.71423=47.05777=8=B
> lack of tools not only mean "no tool exist",
> it also means "tool not found for the contributor"
>
> how can the new contributor wishing to add an address find this tool?
> there's no way he'll find it. it's an advanced tool for the 1%
> of the most motivated contributors of for newbie at a mapping party.
> the other clicks on edit or note. it is osm.org's ergonomics it-self 
> and/or the greeting message during registration that must be improved
> so that the new contributor can find the tool best suited to his 
> contribution

That doesn't make the slightest difference, because the only people
adding addresses in any meaningful way are those 1% of contributors.

Just imagine that we increase the number of new OSM contributors by an
order of magnitude, to ~2'000'000 per year, and just as magically we get
them to make the single edit they typically make to be adding an
address, instead of whatever they actually wanted to do. Even then, in
the as good as it gets fantasy scenario, it would only be 20% of the
current run rate. And that in turn is probably an order of magnitude or
so too low for Steve (aka 50 years or so to "complete" world wide coverage).

Simon


> Regards,
> Marc
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[marc marc]

Hello,

Simon Poole :
> The issue with addresses is definitely not due to a lack of tools 
> for OSM contributors. For example
> https://regio-osm.de/hausnummerauswertung/anzeige_dynamisch.html?land=Schweiz=8.71423=47.05777=8=B

lack of tools not only mean "no tool exist",
it also means "tool not found for the contributor"

how can the new contributor wishing to add an address find this tool?
there's no way he'll find it. it's an advanced tool for the 1%
of the most motivated contributors of for newbie at a mapping party.
the other clicks on edit or note. it is osm.org's ergonomics it-self 
and/or the greeting message during registration that must be improved
so that the new contributor can find the tool best suited to his 
contribution

Regards,
Marc
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Simon Poole]

Just as a further data point for the discussion: we are currently adding
roughly 10'000'000 addresses per year relatively constant since 2013,
with some exceptions due to imports (mainly NL in 2014 I believe).




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Simon Poole]

The issue with addresses is definitely not due to a lack of tools for
OSM contributors. For example
https://regio-osm.de/hausnummerauswertung/anzeige_dynamisch.html?land=Schweiz=8.71423=47.05777=8=B
which covers essentially all the analytics needed for comparison with
open data datasets and that since years (not mention the various address
QA layers available, again since years). On the data entry side there
are good tools both for surveying, import and conflation en masse.

What might be missing is simpler variant of
https://osmybiz.osm.ch/#/18/47.40514/8.40289 (I actually have the domain
addmyaddress.org stashed away somewhere for that), but while it would be
nice to provide a simple facility for people to check and potentially
add their address, it is clear that the targeted long tail is not going
to make a substantial difference in coverage.

So what it really boils down to is grunt work*time (and that is even
true for imports). In Central Europe we are well on the way to
acceptable coverage, given a couple of years more I suspect it will be
really good. Nearly everywhere else (special case the US, and apologies
to all the the exceptions to "nearly everywhere") we are missing
essential metadata that should come first, aka road names and
references, POIs, places and so on, essentially all the stuff that
building doodling and ML doesn't provide, but is essential to actually
having a usable map.

Simon

Am 07.11.2019 um 13:18 schrieb marc marc:
> Hello,
>
>> We've been "addressing the address topic" for more than 
>> 5 years in France with our BANO project.
> and despite the amount of opendata information available, 5 years later,
> there is still a lot of red (missing road name or mismatch between
> osm and opendata).
>
> I agree with the original author: there is a lack of a simple tool
> to contribute more effectively to addresses.
> for example a new contributor has no way to validate the name of a 
> street from the opendata. Osmose and BANO layers are good advanced tools 
> but are not adapted to this kind of beginner audience but also out of 
> their sight.
>
> there is also a lack of awareness that missing addresses are
> a lack of osm compared to some proprietary solutions.
>
> Regards,
> Marc
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[marc marc]

Hello,

> We've been "addressing the address topic" for more than 
> 5 years in France with our BANO project.

and despite the amount of opendata information available, 5 years later,
there is still a lot of red (missing road name or mismatch between
osm and opendata).

I agree with the original author: there is a lack of a simple tool
to contribute more effectively to addresses.
for example a new contributor has no way to validate the name of a 
street from the opendata. Osmose and BANO layers are good advanced tools 
but are not adapted to this kind of beginner audience but also out of 
their sight.

there is also a lack of awareness that missing addresses are
a lack of osm compared to some proprietary solutions.

Regards,
Marc
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Yves]

Wait,. .. when was the 'noname' layer gone?
Yves

Le 7 novembre 2019 08:06:27 GMT+01:00, Christian Quest 
 a écrit :
>We've been "addressing the address topic" for more than 5 years in
>France
>with our BANO project.
>
>Here is an overlay I created back then to show existing and missing
>address
>data in OSM compared to available OSM compatible sources.
>
>http://osm13.openstreetmap.fr/~cquest/leaflet/bano.html#16/48.7908/2.6542
>
>Green: the address is in OSM (and the named road too)
>Blue: address is missing but the road name exist in OSM
>Red: address missing and we found no road with that name nearby
>
>If you want to make missing data obvious, you should no dimm the
>shapes,
>but make them highly visible.
>The goal with the above rendering became "dégommer du rouge" (get rid
>of
>red).
>
>
>Le mar. 5 nov. 2019 à 19:43, Steve Coast  a écrit
>:
>
>> Hello
>>
>>
>>
>> Maps have three basic components: Display (does it look nice?),
>Routing
>> (Can I get from a to b?) and Geocoding (Where is this address?).
>>
>>
>>
>> OSM is extremely good at the first one, and pretty good at the second
>one.
>> But it’s pretty deficient in the third area: address data.
>>
>>
>>
>> The question is, how can we fix this? Addresses are a big, big
>problem in
>> terms of how much data we need to go collect. There are a few ways
>forward
>> with outside commercial or government data, but they tend to be
>difficult
>> because the data is patchy or licensed in ways that aren’t very
>compatible
>> with OSM.
>>
>>
>>
>> It seems like it would be a good idea to think about this from the
>bottom
>> up in a community way, and this doesn’t really exist in OSM right
>now. It
>> seems like we need better feedback loops to:
>>
>>
>>
>>1. Community can see where the address data is (and isn’t),
>because
>>it’s not very obvious today when using osm.org
>>2. Make the tools to add address data better so that it’s easier
>to
>>fix.
>>
>>
>>
>> To that end, here’s a tile server that highlights address data:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>http://ec2-52-50-19-165.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/#10/39.7561/-104.9574
>>
>>
>>
>> It shows roads with address data normally and kind-of hides other
>roads,
>> to make it obvious that “something is wrong with this map”. We could
>have a
>> tag (maybe it exists already) that says “this road doesn’t have
>addresses”
>> and/or a tag that says “this road is complete”. (right now it’s just
>got
>> Colorado and Utah in it).
>>
>>
>>
>> When OSM started, the map looked very broken and incomplete because
>there
>> was missing data all over the place. This created a large incentive
>to go
>> fix the map. The idea with this tileserver is to do the same thing
>and make
>> the map look broken to create a large incentive to fix it. If we, one
>day,
>> switched the main osm.org site to using this rendering then it would
>> create an urgent need to find all the addresses in the places where
>they
>> exist. It could also be done on a temporary basis for a few weeks, or
>on a
>> per-country basis or some other slow introduction to see if it
>worked. It’s
>> just an idea.
>>
>>
>>
>> On the tools side, there’s much that can be done to make collecting
>and
>> entering addresses easier. I’ve been collecting UI/UX changes to
>tools
>> (e.g. iD or Go Map!) that would make addresses better:
>>
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address_SIG
>>
>>
>>
>> It also seems worthwhile to create a group of people interested in
>> addressing in OSM (an address special interest group or working
>group) to
>> push these ideas forward so that we can “finish” OSM by getting all
>the
>> addresses done.
>>
>>
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>>
>>
>> Best
>>
>>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Mateusz Konieczny]

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/StreetComplete/Quests 

and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/StreetComplete
for more info, including full list of available predefined tasks.

6 Nov 2019, 20:40 by talk@openstreetmap.org:

> For your usecase, Tom, perhaps Street-Complete would work for you if you 
> turned on all the building-related quests and turned off the other quests?
> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.westnordost.streetcomplete=en_US
>  
> 
>
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 11:33 AM Tom Russell <> tom.russ...@ouce.ox.ac.uk 
> > > wrote:
>
>>
>> Am Mi., 6. Nov. 2019 um 09:17 Uhr schrieb Oleksiy Muzalyev <>> 
>> oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch >> >:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On the main >>> osm.org >> building and select "Show address" or "Add a note here" . What if a new 
>>> type of a note is introduced, a structured address note?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>
>> This is something I’ve been thinking about recently, with a slightly broader 
>> interest in building data more generally.
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>
>> As part of an academic project (>> https://colouring.london/ 
>> >> ) looking at buildings in London in the UK, 
>> we’re thinking about how to collect various building data attributes. We’re 
>> not currently using OpenStreetMap data for our buildings, however I would be 
>> interested to look into ways of linking to, working with, or building on OSM 
>> in the future.
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>
>> It might be interesting to create a lighter, more restricted user interface 
>> for editing the map, for example following the idea of an “Address” 
>> structured note, or to collect other data about buildings (number of 
>> storeys, commercial use). Or I could imagine a system that doesn’t edit OSM 
>> directly but creates a “review queue” of linked data which could feed into 
>> the main database as mappers work through it.
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>
>> All early ideas - in any case, I’ll be interested to follow an Addressing 
>> SIG.
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> ___
>>  talk mailing list
>>  >> talk@openstreetmap.org 
>>  >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk 
>> 
>>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Christian Quest]

We've been "addressing the address topic" for more than 5 years in France
with our BANO project.

Here is an overlay I created back then to show existing and missing address
data in OSM compared to available OSM compatible sources.

http://osm13.openstreetmap.fr/~cquest/leaflet/bano.html#16/48.7908/2.6542

Green: the address is in OSM (and the named road too)
Blue: address is missing but the road name exist in OSM
Red: address missing and we found no road with that name nearby

If you want to make missing data obvious, you should no dimm the shapes,
but make them highly visible.
The goal with the above rendering became "dégommer du rouge" (get rid of
red).


Le mar. 5 nov. 2019 à 19:43, Steve Coast  a écrit :

> Hello
>
>
>
> Maps have three basic components: Display (does it look nice?), Routing
> (Can I get from a to b?) and Geocoding (Where is this address?).
>
>
>
> OSM is extremely good at the first one, and pretty good at the second one.
> But it’s pretty deficient in the third area: address data.
>
>
>
> The question is, how can we fix this? Addresses are a big, big problem in
> terms of how much data we need to go collect. There are a few ways forward
> with outside commercial or government data, but they tend to be difficult
> because the data is patchy or licensed in ways that aren’t very compatible
> with OSM.
>
>
>
> It seems like it would be a good idea to think about this from the bottom
> up in a community way, and this doesn’t really exist in OSM right now. It
> seems like we need better feedback loops to:
>
>
>
>1. Community can see where the address data is (and isn’t), because
>it’s not very obvious today when using osm.org
>2. Make the tools to add address data better so that it’s easier to
>fix.
>
>
>
> To that end, here’s a tile server that highlights address data:
>
>
>
>
> http://ec2-52-50-19-165.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/#10/39.7561/-104.9574
>
>
>
> It shows roads with address data normally and kind-of hides other roads,
> to make it obvious that “something is wrong with this map”. We could have a
> tag (maybe it exists already) that says “this road doesn’t have addresses”
> and/or a tag that says “this road is complete”. (right now it’s just got
> Colorado and Utah in it).
>
>
>
> When OSM started, the map looked very broken and incomplete because there
> was missing data all over the place. This created a large incentive to go
> fix the map. The idea with this tileserver is to do the same thing and make
> the map look broken to create a large incentive to fix it. If we, one day,
> switched the main osm.org site to using this rendering then it would
> create an urgent need to find all the addresses in the places where they
> exist. It could also be done on a temporary basis for a few weeks, or on a
> per-country basis or some other slow introduction to see if it worked. It’s
> just an idea.
>
>
>
> On the tools side, there’s much that can be done to make collecting and
> entering addresses easier. I’ve been collecting UI/UX changes to tools
> (e.g. iD or Go Map!) that would make addresses better:
>
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address_SIG
>
>
>
> It also seems worthwhile to create a group of people interested in
> addressing in OSM (an address special interest group or working group) to
> push these ideas forward so that we can “finish” OSM by getting all the
> addresses done.
>
>
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
> Best
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>


-- 
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Kathleen Lu via talk]

For your usecase, Tom, perhaps Street-Complete would work for you if you
turned on all the building-related quests and turned off the other quests?
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.westnordost.streetcomplete=en_US

On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 11:33 AM Tom Russell 
wrote:

> Am Mi., 6. Nov. 2019 um 09:17 Uhr schrieb Oleksiy Muzalyev <
> oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch>:
>
> On the main osm.org site one can right-click on a building and select
> "Show address" or "Add a note here" . What if a new type of a note is
> introduced, a structured address note?
>
>
>
> This is something I’ve been thinking about recently, with a slightly
> broader interest in building data more generally.
>
>
>
> As part of an academic project (https://colouring.london/) looking at
> buildings in London in the UK, we’re thinking about how to collect various
> building data attributes. We’re not currently using OpenStreetMap data for
> our buildings, however I would be interested to look into ways of linking
> to, working with, or building on OSM in the future.
>
>
>
> It might be interesting to create a lighter, more restricted user
> interface for editing the map, for example following the idea of an
> “Address” structured note, or to collect other data about buildings (number
> of storeys, commercial use). Or I could imagine a system that doesn’t edit
> OSM directly but creates a “review queue” of linked data which could feed
> into the main database as mappers work through it.
>
>
>
> All early ideas - in any case, I’ll be interested to follow an Addressing
> SIG.
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Tom
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Tom Russell]

Am Mi., 6. Nov. 2019 um 09:17 Uhr schrieb Oleksiy Muzalyev 
mailto:oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch>>:
On the main osm.org site one can right-click on a building and 
select "Show address" or "Add a note here" . What if a new type of a note is 
introduced, a structured address note?

This is something I’ve been thinking about recently, with a slightly broader 
interest in building data more generally.

As part of an academic project (https://colouring.london/) looking at buildings 
in London in the UK, we’re thinking about how to collect various building data 
attributes. We’re not currently using OpenStreetMap data for our buildings, 
however I would be interested to look into ways of linking to, working with, or 
building on OSM in the future.

It might be interesting to create a lighter, more restricted user interface for 
editing the map, for example following the idea of an “Address” structured 
note, or to collect other data about buildings (number of storeys, commercial 
use). Or I could imagine a system that doesn’t edit OSM directly but creates a 
“review queue” of linked data which could feed into the main database as 
mappers work through it.

All early ideas - in any case, I’ll be interested to follow an Addressing SIG.

Best wishes,
Tom
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mi., 6. Nov. 2019 um 09:17 Uhr schrieb Oleksiy Muzalyev <
oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch>:

> On the main osm.org site one can right-click on a building and select
> "Show address" or "Add a note here" . What if a new type of a note is
> introduced, a structured address note?
>
> The structured address note entry form will consist of several input
> fields:
>
> Building number: ...
> Street (avenue): ...
> Post index (zip code, postal code): ...
> City (town, village): ...
> Region (State, Canton, Department): ...
> Country: ...
>
> It could also include a captcha to prevent mass automated entries.
>
> Usually people do know very well addresses of buildings in which they
> live, work, or which they visit. This way they will know that the OSM map
> is interested to map the correct postal address, since there is this
> readily available structured address entry form. So they can add an address
> without learning how to use a complex map editor.
>


I also believe it would be very benificial to call explicitly for address
contributions from unregistered users of the map. I am seeing a lot of
notes created by anonymous users, and providing a formalized way for
address entry would likely make people more frequently provide this kind of
information. If the form is structured, it could also be converted to
actual osm data more quickly by mappers (i.e. this assumes that those
anonymously contributed addresses would still have to be individually
reviewed by mappers).

In order to get good address coverage, provided we prefer local knowledge
over imported data, we must increase the contributor base. Notes have
proven to be able to provide useful information from people who are
reluctant to register.

Cheers
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

On the main osm.org site one can right-click on a building and select 
"Show address" or "Add a note here" . What if a new type of a note is 
introduced, a structured address note?


The structured address note entry form will consist of several input fields:

Building number: ...
Street (avenue): ...
Post index (zip code, postal code): ...
City (town, village): ...
Region (State, Canton, Department): ...
Country: ...

It could also include a captcha to prevent mass automated entries.

Usually people do know very well addresses of buildings in which they 
live, work, or which they visit. This way they will know that the OSM 
map is interested to map the correct postal address, since there is this 
readily available structured address entry form. So they can add an 
address without learning how to use a complex map editor.


Best regards,
Oleksiy

On 11/5/19 19:37, Steve Coast wrote:


Hello

Maps have three basic components: Display (does it look nice?), 
Routing (Can I get from a to b?) and Geocoding (Where is this address?).


OSM is extremely good at the first one, and pretty good at the second 
one. But it’s pretty deficient in the third area: address data.


The question is, how can we fix this? Addresses are a big, big problem 
in terms of how much data we need to go collect. There are a few ways 
forward with outside commercial or government data, but they tend to 
be difficult because the data is patchy or licensed in ways that 
aren’t very compatible with OSM.


It seems like it would be a good idea to think about this from the 
bottom up in a community way, and this doesn’t really exist in OSM 
right now. It seems like we need better feedback loops to:


 1. Community can see where the address data is (and isn’t), because
it’s not very obvious today when using osm.org
 2. Make the tools to add address data better so that it’s easier to fix.

To that end, here’s a tile server that highlights address data:

http://ec2-52-50-19-165.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/#10/39.7561/-104.9574

It shows roads with address data normally and kind-of hides other 
roads, to make it obvious that “something is wrong with this map”. We 
could have a tag (maybe it exists already) that says “this road 
doesn’t have addresses” and/or a tag that says “this road is 
complete”. (right now it’s just got Colorado and Utah in it).


When OSM started, the map looked very broken and incomplete because 
there was missing data all over the place. This created a large 
incentive to go fix the map. The idea with this tileserver is to do 
the same thing and make the map look broken to create a large 
incentive to fix it. If we, one day, switched the main osm.org site to 
using this rendering then it would create an urgent need to find all 
the addresses in the places where they exist. It could also be done on 
a temporary basis for a few weeks, or on a per-country basis or some 
other slow introduction to see if it worked. It’s just an idea.


On the tools side, there’s much that can be done to make collecting 
and entering addresses easier. I’ve been collecting UI/UX changes to 
tools (e.g. iD or Go Map!) that would make addresses better:


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address_SIG

It also seems worthwhile to create a group of people interested in 
addressing in OSM (an address special interest group or working group) 
to push these ideas forward so that we can “finish” OSM by getting all 
the addresses done.


What do you think?

Best

Steve


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[James]

It's a pretty cool concept, but doesn't necessarily invoke ALL addresses
have been found, what happens if a few addresses are there? What happens if
someone adds 1 or 2 addresses?

Pretty good QA tool I'm guessing?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Addressing SIG

[Steve Coast]

Hello

Maps have three basic components: Display (does it look nice?), Routing (Can I 
get from a to b?) and Geocoding (Where is this address?).

OSM is extremely good at the first one, and pretty good at the second one. But 
it’s pretty deficient in the third area: address data.

The question is, how can we fix this? Addresses are a big, big problem in terms 
of how much data we need to go collect. There are a few ways forward with 
outside commercial or government data, but they tend to be difficult because 
the data is patchy or licensed in ways that aren’t very compatible with OSM.

It seems like it would be a good idea to think about this from the bottom up in 
a community way, and this doesn’t really exist in OSM right now. It seems like 
we need better feedback loops to:


  1.  Community can see where the address data is (and isn’t), because it’s not 
very obvious today when using osm.org
  2.  Make the tools to add address data better so that it’s easier to fix.

To that end, here’s a tile server that highlights address data:

   
http://ec2-52-50-19-165.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/#10/39.7561/-104.9574

It shows roads with address data normally and kind-of hides other roads, to 
make it obvious that “something is wrong with this map”. We could have a tag 
(maybe it exists already) that says “this road doesn’t have addresses” and/or a 
tag that says “this road is complete”. (right now it’s just got Colorado and 
Utah in it).

When OSM started, the map looked very broken and incomplete because there was 
missing data all over the place. This created a large incentive to go fix the 
map. The idea with this tileserver is to do the same thing and make the map 
look broken to create a large incentive to fix it. If we, one day, switched the 
main osm.org site to using this rendering then it would create an urgent need 
to find all the addresses in the places where they exist. It could also be done 
on a temporary basis for a few weeks, or on a per-country basis or some other 
slow introduction to see if it worked. It’s just an idea.

On the tools side, there’s much that can be done to make collecting and 
entering addresses easier. I’ve been collecting UI/UX changes to tools (e.g. iD 
or Go Map!) that would make addresses better:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address_SIG

It also seems worthwhile to create a group of people interested in addressing 
in OSM (an address special interest group or working group) to push these ideas 
forward so that we can “finish” OSM by getting all the addresses done.

What do you think?

Best

Steve

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing systems (Was: Paper/Article about stagnation in OSM)

[Steve Doerr]

On 03/08/2018 09:22, oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch wrote:
I just tried to create the 3-words address for a building in Odessa, 
Ukraine. The system suggested "dressings.cookies.brothers". It would 
be close to impossible to transmit these three words over the 
telephone to a local taxi dispatcher.


Some people may just not know English words well enough. The same 
about 8 English letters. But 8 Cyrillic letters may work. If the UTF8 
encoding is used in a database then both Latin and Cyrillic letters 
could be used, and, perhaps, other scripts.


You can set the language to Russian. This, I believe, gives the address 
as лотерея.русый.замок


--
Steve

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing systems (Was: Paper/Article about stagnation in OSM)

[oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch]

I understand what you mean and I share your view. I would like just to mention that the European civilization absorbed others' achievements massively.For example, corn ended for good famines in Europe. At the same time, it was the product of five thousand years selection effort by people of South America. Or Hindu-Arabic numerals, or coffee from Ethiopia, the list is very long.Perhaps, it is still possible to co-develop without interference. Perhaps, by creating the new open source address system, we get the feedback and improve our obsolete 18th century address system too.Best regards,OleksiySent from my Huawei Mobile___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing systems (Was: Paper/Article about stagnation in OSM)

[_ dikkeknodel]

To me this is just another way of colonisation, forcing (technical) systems 
upon other people who have no say in them. They are communicated as a means to 
help people, but are mainly to make a buck in the end.

Instead we at OSM should leave it up to the people themselves to choose how to 
describe their location in a way they feel like, and provide a means to do so 
based on that. Technology should be designed to support people in their 
preferred way of life, not to force them to a way of life because that’s what 
most easily is implemented in technology.

Cheers,
dikkeknodel
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Addressing systems (Was: Paper/Article about stagnation in OSM)

[Frederik Ramm]

Subject changed ;)

On 03.08.2018 08:41, Maarten Deen wrote:
> The extra penalty for What3words is that you also need an active
> internet connection (or a huge offline addressing database) to convert
> the three words to a location. 

...

> Is it easier and
> quicker for me to first open some app to try and find my 8 letter
> location or my 3 What3words, or is it easier and quicker to just read
> out my gps location?

I am certainly not a what3words fan (I hope this is obvious) but in the
service of truth I need to say two things for them: First, they claim
that their offline addressing database is actually not huge, but small
enough to use on most devices. The problem is not that the database is
huge, it's that the database is protected and they'll slap a takedown
notice on anyone using it without their agreement, e.g.
https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2016/2016-07-05-what3words.md.

Second, they claim that saying three natural language words on a
potentially low-quality radio or mobile phone connection leaves less
room for misreadings than dictating a string of numbers. They claim that
the dictionary has been curated in a way as to not have similar-sounding
words, a claim that, I believe, has been often ridiculed with examples
but I don't have any at hand right now.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Addressing System in OSM

[Besfort Guri]

Who can help me with Addressing System in OpenStreetMap, I need like a
tutorial for that because I am trying to figure out some problems in Kosovo,
but I need help to do that ?...

-- 
Regards
Besfort Guri
+377 44 49 88 91
www.besiguri.wordpress.com
http://besfortp.posterous.com/
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing System in OSM

[Josh Doe]

Start here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address

Generally you just need the addr:housenumber and addr:street tags, but
if you're more specific with your question we can do a better job
answering.

Nominatim can also be useful for debugging purposes, go here:
http://open.mapquestapi.com/nominatim/v1/

Search for a place, then view details to see some useful information.

-Josh

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Besfort Guri besig...@gmail.com wrote:
 Who can help me with Addressing System in OpenStreetMap, I need like a
 tutorial for that because I am trying to figure out some problems in Kosovo,
 but I need help to do that ?...

 --
 Regards
 Besfort Guri
 +377 44 49 88 91
 www.besiguri.wordpress.com
 http://besfortp.posterous.com/



 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[marcus.wolschon]

On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:29:14 -0500, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
 On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com
wrote:
 It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
 houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed.
 
 But that doesn't always reflect reality.  The reality, at least in
 many parts of the world, is that the streets are given blocks of
 potential addresses, and the houses/plots/whatever are given actual
 addresses from those potential address blocks.

So your point being?
These blocks can be interpolation-ways next to the way
and if you like relations you can have both grouped
in an associatedStreet-relation.

 I'd say it's better to approximate the gap between the road and the
 houses
 (10m?) than to just put it on the centreline due to that being easier.
 
 First of all, how would you approximate the gap?  You mean by hand?

10m along the normal of the road.

 Secondly, what if the houses aren't yet there?  Tiger address data
 represents *potential* address blocks, not *actual* address blocks.
 There may or may not be any actual houses along those roads.

Then we have to assume it's there until a mapper who can actually look
for houses can correct this. That's the best we can do.

Marcus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Dave Hansen]

On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 15:19 -0500, Mike N. wrote:
 FYI - I applied the experimental script which creates address
 interpolation ways at -
 
 http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/import/tiger2osm/shape_to_osm-Tiger.py
 
 The results are at 
 
 http://cid-b17e2f1a4d519b13.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/tl%
 5E_2009%5E_45045%5E_addrInterpolation.zip
 
Cool stuff!  I've been looking at doing the same thing.  Which osgeo
python code are you using?

-- Dave


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Mike N.]

 http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/import/tiger2osm/shape_to_osm-Tiger.py

 Cool stuff!  I've been looking at doing the same thing.  Which osgeo
 python code are you using?

 I'm using the default lib for Fedora - GDAL 1.6.0; release 8.fc11 . 
Someone else (in Georgia?) created all the code, but I don't know if they 
actually uploaded the address interpolation anywhere.
 


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Andy Allan]

 Ian Dees wrote:
Hi everyone,

I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing data
in the form of Right/Left From Addr and Right/Left To Addr on each
street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
separate way just for the addressing information.

It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed. I'd say
it's better to approximate the gap between the road and the houses
(10m?) than to just put it on the centreline due to that being easier.
This has precedent already - a couple of areas in the US has Karlsruhe
schema addressing converted from what is clearly centreline data to
spread the addresses out on either side:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.676517lon=-84.012017zoom=18layers=B000FTF

Your point about 3 time the number of ways becomes increasing relevant
with the decreasing quality of the data you are importing - 3 times
the headache of fixing dreadful road geometries would be too much!

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)
ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote:
 I'd let someone else work out if they can transcribe the data to another
 format once its in OSM, should that be desirable

I disagree there. It's much better to put the effort in during the
initial import, than to import things badly and try to fix it up
later. We've been working on lots of post-import fixups in the last 6
months and it's much harder than everyone assumes. The 4 months to
remove TIGER node tags is a case in point - it took less time than
that to import them!

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)]

Andy Allan [mailto:gravityst...@gmail.com] wrote:
Sent: 12 November 2009 2:15 PM
To: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)
Cc: Ian Dees; OSM Talk; talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

 Ian Dees wrote:
Hi everyone,

I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing
data
in the form of Right/Left From Addr and Right/Left To Addr on each
street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
separate way just for the addressing information.

It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed. I'd say
it's better to approximate the gap between the road and the houses
(10m?) than to just put it on the centreline due to that being easier.
This has precedent already - a couple of areas in the US has Karlsruhe
schema addressing converted from what is clearly centreline data to
spread the addresses out on either side:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.676517lon=-
84.012017zoom=18layers=B000FTF

Your point about 3 time the number of ways becomes increasing relevant
with the decreasing quality of the data you are importing - 3 times
the headache of fixing dreadful road geometries would be too much!

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)
ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote:
 I'd let someone else work out if they can transcribe the data to another
 format once its in OSM, should that be desirable

I disagree there. It's much better to put the effort in during the
initial import, than to import things badly and try to fix it up
later. We've been working on lots of post-import fixups in the last 6
months and it's much harder than everyone assumes. The 4 months to
remove TIGER node tags is a case in point - it took less time than
that to import them!

You make a good point and I certainly wouldn't want to see data imported
that was either difficult to rework or didn't make logical sense. If its
been done before to offset left/right data automagically I too would vote
for that as a preferred import method.

Cheers Andy R



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Shalabh]

Which somehow reminds of the AND data imported to OSM. I am not sure whether
AND and TIGER had anything to do with each other but most of the highways
from the AND data in India are straight lines, often a couple of hundred
metres off the actual road. I have been deleting old tracks and adding new
tracks. Just to give you an example, refer the below frame.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=32.1488lon=76.4172zoom=13layers=B000FTF

This road, a curvy mountain road was a straight line even at the highest
zoom level with no waypoints whatsoever till 2-3 days ago. I have deleted 3
such roads in the last week and replaced with the new ones. And I know there
are thousands more to go. I doubt if roads like these actually add any
value, either from a mapping or routing point of view to OSM.

Regards,
Shalabh

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) 
ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote:

 Andy Allan [mailto:gravityst...@gmail.com] wrote:
 Sent: 12 November 2009 2:15 PM
 To: Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)
 Cc: Ian Dees; OSM Talk; talk...@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question
 
  Ian Dees wrote:
 Hi everyone,
 
 I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing
 data
 in the form of Right/Left From Addr and Right/Left To Addr on each
 street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to
 the
 road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
 separate way just for the addressing information.
 
 It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
 houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed. I'd say
 it's better to approximate the gap between the road and the houses
 (10m?) than to just put it on the centreline due to that being easier.
 This has precedent already - a couple of areas in the US has Karlsruhe
 schema addressing converted from what is clearly centreline data to
 spread the addresses out on either side:
 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.676517lon=-
 84.012017zoom=18layers=B000FTF
 
 Your point about 3 time the number of ways becomes increasing relevant
 with the decreasing quality of the data you are importing - 3 times
 the headache of fixing dreadful road geometries would be too much!
 
 On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)
 ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote:
  I'd let someone else work out if they can transcribe the data to another
  format once its in OSM, should that be desirable
 
 I disagree there. It's much better to put the effort in during the
 initial import, than to import things badly and try to fix it up
 later. We've been working on lots of post-import fixups in the last 6
 months and it's much harder than everyone assumes. The 4 months to
 remove TIGER node tags is a case in point - it took less time than
 that to import them!

 You make a good point and I certainly wouldn't want to see data imported
 that was either difficult to rework or didn't make logical sense. If its
 been done before to offset left/right data automagically I too would vote
 for that as a preferred import method.

 Cheers Andy R



 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
 It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
 houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed.

But that doesn't always reflect reality.  The reality, at least in
many parts of the world, is that the streets are given blocks of
potential addresses, and the houses/plots/whatever are given actual
addresses from those potential address blocks.

 I'd say it's better to approximate the gap between the road and the houses
 (10m?) than to just put it on the centreline due to that being easier.

First of all, how would you approximate the gap?  You mean by hand?

Secondly, what if the houses aren't yet there?  Tiger address data
represents *potential* address blocks, not *actual* address blocks.
There may or may not be any actual houses along those roads.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[andrzej zaborowski]

2009/11/12 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
 On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
 It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
 houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed.

 But that doesn't always reflect reality.  The reality, at least in
 many parts of the world, is that the streets are given blocks of
 potential addresses, and the houses/plots/whatever are given actual
 addresses from those potential address blocks.

If we're going to go into detail, no type of interpolation reflects
reality, it's just interpolation.  It's there to help the mappers add
proper address / other information and in the meantime give users
approximate geocoding functionality.

If you look at TIGER a lot of it doesn't reflect reality, it just one step.

Cheers

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Mike N.]

FYI - I applied the experimental script which creates address interpolation 
ways at -

http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/import/tiger2osm/shape_to_osm-Tiger.py

The results are at 

http://cid-b17e2f1a4d519b13.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/tl%5E_2009%5E_45045%5E_addrInterpolation.zip

 (7 MB zipped, 88 MB unzipped).

  Runtime for my county was about 45 seconds.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Apollinaris Schoell]

On 12 Nov 2009, at 8:28 , Ian Dees wrote:

 On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com 
  wrote:

 On 12 Nov 2009, at 6:14 , Andy Allan wrote:

  I disagree there. It's much better to put the effort in during the
  initial import, than to import things badly and try to fix it up
  later. We've been working on lots of post-import fixups in the  
 last 6
  months and it's much harder than everyone assumes. The 4 months to
  remove TIGER node tags is a case in point - it took less time than
  that to import them!
 

 +10
 Give everyone a chance to work in a constructive way and don't expect
 others to clean the mess bad import left behind.
 No wonder there are only few motivated mappers in US. In Canada they
 do a much better job in integrating the community and don't import
 every shape file blindly just because it's available.

 Not to start a holy war over what community is better, but there  
 weren't a whole lot of mappers in the US (at least on talk or talk- 
 us) when we started doing the TIGER import…

It's not about better community. The point is an empty map doesn't  
attract average mappers. someone ambitious needs to start the whole  
thing. A nearly finished map doesn't attract the ambitious mappers. A  
broken map doesn't attract either one.
Imports help with the first challenge. Bad imports not at all.
Tiger import was very useful and done in the best way known at that  
time. but has many problems. technical and community wise.  We  
shouldn't make the same mistakes again just to fill the database.


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Dave Hansen]

On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 10:28 -0600, Ian Dees wrote:
 
 Give everyone a chance to work in a constructive way and don't expect
 others to clean the mess bad import left behind.
 No wonder there are only few motivated mappers in US. In Canada they
 do a much better job in integrating the community and don't import
 every shape file blindly just because it's available.
 
 Not to start a holy war over what community is better, but there
 weren't a whole lot of mappers in the US (at least on talk or talk-us)
 when we started doing the TIGER import...

People were being actively told not to map in the US because we had
TIGER coming and it would replace any work you ended up doing.

The standard OSM user tries to find their street first.  The typical US
OSM experience has gone from, My street isn't there to My street is
crooked.

-- Dave


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Ian Dees]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.comwrote:


 On 12 Nov 2009, at 6:14 , Andy Allan wrote:

  I disagree there. It's much better to put the effort in during the
  initial import, than to import things badly and try to fix it up
  later. We've been working on lots of post-import fixups in the last 6
  months and it's much harder than everyone assumes. The 4 months to
  remove TIGER node tags is a case in point - it took less time than
  that to import them!
 

 +10
 Give everyone a chance to work in a constructive way and don't expect
 others to clean the mess bad import left behind.
 No wonder there are only few motivated mappers in US. In Canada they
 do a much better job in integrating the community and don't import
 every shape file blindly just because it's available.


Not to start a holy war over what community is better, but there weren't a
whole lot of mappers in the US (at least on talk or talk-us) when we started
doing the TIGER import...
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Apollinaris Schoell]

On 12 Nov 2009, at 6:14 , Andy Allan wrote:

 I disagree there. It's much better to put the effort in during the
 initial import, than to import things badly and try to fix it up
 later. We've been working on lots of post-import fixups in the last 6
 months and it's much harder than everyone assumes. The 4 months to
 remove TIGER node tags is a case in point - it took less time than
 that to import them!


+10
Give everyone a chance to work in a constructive way and don't expect  
others to clean the mess bad import left behind.
No wonder there are only few motivated mappers in US. In Canada they  
do a much better job in integrating the community and don't import  
every shape file blindly just because it's available.



 Cheers,
 Andy


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Apollinaris Schoell
ascho...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
 It probably has to be a relation.  Include a start node, an end node,
 and a list of one or more ways (which are connected to form one
 logical way).

  the ways have to be split at the start/end node.

Not if you use a relation.
 the relation members have to be ordered.

No they don't.

 how is that easier than the Karlsruhe scheme?

It's not really easier so much as more correct.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:

 On the other hand, putting the information directly on the way would
 be problematic for many reasons.  Ranges might span multiple ways, and
 right/left has to be reversed whenever the way is reversed being the
 most troublesome.

 this is enough reason to stay away from such a scheme. if it's too
 difficult no one will use it or they will break the data.

 This scheme works for all of the places that I'm sourcing data from... they
 have line segments that are tagged with the left/right-begin/end addresses.
 Each road is broken up into line segments that have different address
 values.

I'm not sure what your data is like, but the Tiger data inaccurately
splits the address ranges when it needs to split a segment.  In other
words, if a road goes from 2 to 100, and it needs to be split in half,
Tiger blindly splits the segments up as 2 - 48 and 50-100 *without
even checking if this is correct*.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
 It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
 houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed.

But that doesn't always reflect reality.  The reality, at least in
many parts of the world, is that the streets are given blocks of
potential addresses, and the houses/plots/whatever are given actual
addresses from those potential address blocks.

 I'd say it's better to approximate the gap between the road and the houses
 (10m?) than to just put it on the centreline due to that being easier.

First of all, how would you approximate the gap?  You mean by hand?

Secondly, what if the houses aren't yet there?  Tiger address data
represents *potential* address blocks, not *actual* address blocks.
There may or may not be any actual houses along those roads.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Apollinaris Schoell]

On 12 Nov 2009, at 11:29 , Anthony wrote:

 On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com  
 wrote:
 It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
 houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed.

 But that doesn't always reflect reality.  The reality, at least in
 many parts of the world, is that the streets are given blocks of
 potential addresses, and the houses/plots/whatever are given actual
 addresses from those potential address blocks.

Don't know any place except in US where this has been done. 

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Dave Hansen]

On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 11:40 -0800, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
 On 12 Nov 2009, at 11:29 , Anthony wrote:
  On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com  
  wrote:
  It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
  houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed.
 
  But that doesn't always reflect reality.  The reality, at least in
  many parts of the world, is that the streets are given blocks of
  potential addresses, and the houses/plots/whatever are given actual
  addresses from those potential address blocks.
 
 Don't know any place except in US where this has been done. 

So, should we ignore the US for addressing entirely since it is
different?  Or, should US addressing use a different scheme than the
rest of the world?  We like being different.

-- Dave


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com wrote:
 Don't know any place except in US where this has been done.

Even if it weren't done anywhere else (which it is, see below), there
are a lot of houses in the US.

 how is that easier than the Karlsruhe scheme?

 It's not really easier so much as more correct.

 why more correct?

Because arbitrarily locating a way 10 meters (or whatever) away from
the road centerline adds artificial precision.

 the address is an attribute of the house not an attribute of the street.

If you want to get technical an actual address is usually an attribute
of a mail delivery point, which may or may not correspond to a house.
But potential addresses (which are likely the data which we are
contemplating importing) are an attribute of the street.

If you want to just leave the data out of OSM altogether, fine.  That
might be a good idea.  Geocoders can use the data within the system it
was designed for.  But if you're going to import it into OSM, you
shouldn't add artificial precision to it.

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:41 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
 If we're going to go into detail, no type of interpolation reflects
 reality, it's just interpolation.

I disagree.  An approximation of reality reflects reality.



On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
 On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
 Don't know any place except in US where this has been done.
 The rural numbering scheme used in Australia is an excellent example, as the
 potential number of addresses is the length of the road in km * 100, and there
 is no expectation that any number of the addresses will be used.

I'm curious:  Does Australia use left/right numbering?

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Apollinaris Schoell]

follow the OSM principle.
map what's on the ground no matter where you are


On 12 Nov 2009, at 11:56 , Dave Hansen wrote:

 On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 11:40 -0800, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
 On 12 Nov 2009, at 11:29 , Anthony wrote:
 On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 It's a fairly well established convention that in OSM it's the
 houses/plots, not the road centrelines, that are addressed.

 But that doesn't always reflect reality.  The reality, at least in
 many parts of the world, is that the streets are given blocks of
 potential addresses, and the houses/plots/whatever are given actual
 addresses from those potential address blocks.

 Don't know any place except in US where this has been done.

 So, should we ignore the US for addressing entirely since it is
 different?  Or, should US addressing use a different scheme than the
 rest of the world?  We like being different.

 -- Dave



___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

 If we're going to go into detail, no type of interpolation reflects
 reality, it's just interpolation.

 I disagree.  An approximation of reality reflects reality.

  Physical street surveys will almost never get 100% reality due to missing
 house numbers, etc.   Are you proposing to discourage physical street
 surveys that are not 100% complete just because the data is all not there?

No, just the opposite.

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com wrote:
 follow the OSM principle.
 map what's on the ground no matter where you are

What's on the ground changes from place to place:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_numbering

In countries like Brazil and Argentina, but also in some villages in
France, this scheme is used also for streets in cities, where the
house number is the distance, measured in meters, from the house to
the start of the street.

For people living near highways or roads [in Latin America] the usual
address is the kilometer of the road in which the house is established
[...] In semi-rural and rural areas [of Australia], where houses and
farms are widely spaced, a numbering system based on tens of metres or
(less commonly) metres has been devised. Thus a farm 2300m from the
start of the road, on the right-hand side would be numbered 230.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Mike N.]

FYI - I applied the experimental script which creates address interpolation 
ways at -

http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/import/tiger2osm/shape_to_osm-Tiger.py

The results are at 

http://cid-b17e2f1a4d519b13.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/tl%5E_2009%5E_45045%5E_addrInterpolation.zip

 (7 MB zipped, 88 MB unzipped).

  Runtime for my county was about 45 seconds.___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
 Every single country has different addressing rules, it's not like
 this particular scheme is special.  That's why someone came up with a
 tagging scheme that can express all or most of these rules

They did?  What scheme is that?

My understanding of the history of the Karlsruhe Schema is that a
bunch of people got together in Karlsruhe and came up with something
that worked for them, explicitly stating that other people should
develop something that works for them.

 If we're going to have special tagging for US then let's have it for
 every country and let's split into many projects and just give up on
 this whole silly idea of having a single map.

Is there a reason you're ignoring the fact that potential addressing
is used in many places outside the US?

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
 Ian hasn't (yet) mentioned whether this data he deals with contains
 potential address ranges or actual ranges, so I assumed actual.

The fact that it's tagged on the line segments representing the road
centerline pretty much guarantees that it's potential.  I highly doubt
they're splitting the line segment every single time a number gets
skipped.

 I agree it may be useful to have the potential assigned range in the db,
 too, using whatever tagging (or in a separate db, since this is not
 stuff on the ground).

I can see keeping it in a separate db, and really I'm leaning toward
that as being the best option.

What are the advantages of having this in the OSM db?  When the roads
change, you're going to have to either re-survey the data or throw out
the address ranges anyway.  The address ranges are pretty much only
useful within the context of the original road centerlines.  Geocoding
or reverse-geocoding software can connect between the two databases
using latitude/longitude pairs.  I can't really see any point in
integrating it.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:
 There are cases with Karlruhe Scheme that need addditional tags like
 Czech addresses but I haven't heard of such cases from US or other
 mappers.

  I recently started using a new modifier tag addr:inclusion to help in
 accurately tagging my survey data (and added it to the wiki
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr )

Cool.  I invented that tag, and that's pretty close to what I meant by it.  :)

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Anthony wrote:
 On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
 Every single country has different addressing rules, it's not like
 this particular scheme is special.  That's why someone came up with a
 tagging scheme that can express all or most of these rules
 
 They did?  What scheme is that?
 
 My understanding of the history of the Karlsruhe Schema is that a
 bunch of people got together in Karlsruhe and came up with something
 that worked for them, explicitly stating that other people should
 develop something that works for them.

Speaking as one of that bunch of people; that ist correct. Of course 
when developing the Karlsruhe Schema we hoped that our work would be 
usable for others as well, but we were under no illusion that there are 
places where it doesn't. (Not sure if I got the double negative right in 
that sentence but you'll know what I mean.)

To be honest, at the time we thought that those places would be in the 
less developed world, where sometimes houses are reported to have 
addresses like 3rd house on left hand side after the tree that looks 
like an elephant. We didn't think that the US would be so different as 
to require their own schema.

If you do develop your own schema then I would ask you to consider to at 
least adhere to the following basic idea that we used:

We said that in the long run, we expect every single house to be on the 
map - either as a node or, more likely, as a building outline - and 
carry its own number. Interpolation ranges, therefore, were meant to be 
something easy for situations where you cannot be bothered to do it 
right. Our expectation is that in the long run, interpolation lines 
will be obsolete.

An interpolation line still maps more or less what's on the ground - at 
least the house numbers at both ends of the line will have been 
surveyed. Many people in Germany even break their interpolation lines if 
houses are missing in between, i.e. if a road has the house numbers 100, 
102, 104, 108, 110, 112 they will create one interpolation line for 
100-104 and one for 108-112.

Now if I understand your situation correctly, the only difference you 
have is that your interpolation lines are one step more abstract; they 
don't give a range of numbers of definitely existing addresses, but 
instead give the range of valid numbers in the block concerned. So you 
know that *if* there is a house #1300 it will be there (but it might not 
exist at all).

My suggestion to this would be to use something like our interpolation 
lines but give them a different name (e.g. instead of addr:interpolation 
call it addr:range or something).

I would also strongly encourage you to use one such line on each side of 
the road, instead of putting tags on the road itself. This makes it very 
clear which side an address is on, better than any tags you can put on 
the way, no matter how many left/right prefixes or suffixes you add to 
those tags. This is one thing we discussed at length when setting up the 
Karlsruhe schema; even here, many people advocated putting something 
like left:from=15, left:to=25, right:from=12, right:to=24 on the ways 
but we'd have none of that. One of many reasons for that being that this 
would interfere with ways being split or combined - this must be doubly 
true for your schema: If you have to split a road in the middle of a 
block because a speed limit starts there, how will you know which 
theoretical house number would be at the split if the house hasn't even 
been built yet?

Of course, and that's the but, if such a schema leads to millions of 
address range ways in places where no houses have been built, then 
that's perhaps a bit confusing...

Thanks for listening.
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 I would also strongly encourage you to use one such line on each side of the
 road, instead of putting tags on the road itself. This makes it very clear
 which side an address is on, better than any tags you can put on the way, no
 matter how many left/right prefixes or suffixes you add to those tags.

Would you map a no right turn as a node 7 meters behind and to the
right of an intersection?  After all, that's more or less what's on
the ground.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Anthony wrote:
 On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 I would also strongly encourage you to use one such line on each side of the
 road, instead of putting tags on the road itself. This makes it very clear
 which side an address is on, better than any tags you can put on the way, no
 matter how many left/right prefixes or suffixes you add to those tags.
 
 Would you map a no right turn as a node 7 meters behind and to the
 right of an intersection?  After all, that's more or less what's on
 the ground.

I might be missing some irony here. I don't know the significance of no 
right turn for you, and I don't know what it has to do with addressing.

Traffic signs, at least where I live, usually are there as a physical 
reminder (or notification) of an abstract concept. The administration 
makes a certain decision - for example, that parking should not be 
allowed in a certain location, or a speed limit should be put in place, 
or whatever. Then signs are put up to inform people of this decision. 
The exact location of the signs is often an implementation detail. The 
sign itself is irrelevant; the abstract concept is what matters.

I try to map the abstract concept wherever possible. Consequently, I'd 
map a no right turn as a relation involving two ways, and not in the 
form of a traffic sign.

I consider interpolation ways to be an abstract thing also. To convey 
the information, they need to be on each side of the road, but, if that 
was your question, to me it doesn't matter whether they are a few 
centimetres away from the road or 10 metres away. As long as there is no 
doubt (for the person viewing the situation in an editor) which road 
they belong to, it's fine. In practice it turns out that you often draw 
the lines approximately where the houses would be on the ground, but to 
me that is not relevant.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
 I consider interpolation ways to be an abstract thing also. To convey the
 information, they need to be on each side of the road

The thing is, they don't.

 As long as there is no doubt (for the
 person viewing the situation in an editor) which road they belong to, it's
 fine.

You mean with the addr:street tag?  Other than that tag, it's quite
common (at least here in Florida) for it to be non-obvious which
road an address belongs to, if you want to put the interpolation
way over top of the houses.  The building might very well be far away
from the road it belongs to, and closer to another road that it
doesn't belong to.  For geolocation using actual addresses, that's a
feature, not a bug - but it doesn't work for potential address ranges
at all.

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:56 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
 2009/11/12 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
 I can see keeping it in a separate db, and really I'm leaning toward
 that as being the best option.

 What are the advantages of having this in the OSM db?  When the roads
 change, you're going to have to either re-survey the data or throw out
 the address ranges anyway.  The address ranges are pretty much only
 useful within the context of the original road centerlines.  Geocoding
 or reverse-geocoding software can connect between the two databases
 using latitude/longitude pairs.  I can't really see any point in
 integrating it.

 On the other hand if you receive a data donation from a densely
 built-up city's council then there will be more existing addresses
 than non-existing ones in the area and it will be easier for local
 mappers to start with all the possible interpolation ways and slowly
 remove fragments than to survey with an empty map.  And will better
 match reality.

*Nod*.  If you can at least semi-manually integrate the data so you're
pretty sure maybe 95% of it is in the general vicinity of the
buildings, that's cool.  But that's only going to be feasible in
certain locations.

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[andrzej zaborowski]

Hiya,

2009/11/12 Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com:
 I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing data
 in the form of Right/Left From Addr and Right/Left To Addr on each
 street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
 road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
 separate way just for the addressing information.

The hope is that local mappers there will be slowly improving imported
data until there are separate points for every address I think?  Then
I'd recommend just adding those separate ways and making it easier for
the mappers to build on this data, instead of making it harder for
nearly everyone dealing with OSM data by adding a whole different
addressing scheme.

Cheers

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Ian Dees]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:55 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hiya,

 2009/11/12 Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com:
  I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing
 data
  in the form of Right/Left From Addr and Right/Left To Addr on each
  street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
  road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
  separate way just for the addressing information.

 The hope is that local mappers there will be slowly improving imported
 data until there are separate points for every address I think?  Then
 I'd recommend just adding those separate ways and making it easier for
 the mappers to build on this data, instead of making it harder for
 nearly everyone dealing with OSM data by adding a whole different
 addressing scheme.


No, I doubt local mappers will improve the data. I sent this mail because
almost all of the data I've seen available for import in the US (all the way
from individual municipalities to TIGER's shapefiles) has this
left/right-from/to scheme for addressing information.

If the expectation is that we will always be following the Karlsruhe schema
(with separate ways on each side of the road centerline), then importing
this addressing data will be next to impossible*.

-Ian

* Ok, not impossible, but the import size would triple and the CPU time to
compute the new addressing-only ways might make it hard for the regular
mapper to do.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Ian Dees]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:47 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.comwrote:


 That's a pretty pessimistic view.


Sorry, I am pretty grumpy today. The area I'm looking at actually has quite
a few mappers already, so I imagine this data would probably get updated
quickly.



 For the record an import I've done had only this left/right - to/from
 housenumber information, too, so I have an ugly python script here
 ready to throw at this kind of data (after adapting to whatever the
 input format is) and I would be happy to do the processing on my PC if
 you decide to go this way.  The whole toolchain should still behave
 reasonably for data size of TIGER (though obviously I didn't have that
 much data)


What does the math look like to handle intersections? Curvy roads?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[andrzej zaborowski]

2009/11/12 Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com:
 What does the math look like to handle intersections? Curvy roads?

I admit that data wasn't complex, all segments were straight and all
nodes were treated as intersections.  Do you have parametric (e.g.
bezier) curves or just lots of short segments making soft turns?  (I'm
optimistic we can figure something out in both cases)

Regards

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[andrzej zaborowski]

2009/11/12 Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com:
 On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:55 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 The hope is that local mappers there will be slowly improving imported
 data until there are separate points for every address I think?  Then
 I'd recommend just adding those separate ways and making it easier for
 the mappers to build on this data, instead of making it harder for
 nearly everyone dealing with OSM data by adding a whole different
 addressing scheme.

 No, I doubt local mappers will improve the data. I sent this mail because

That's a pretty pessimistic view.

 almost all of the data I've seen available for import in the US (all the way
 from individual municipalities to TIGER's shapefiles) has this
 left/right-from/to scheme for addressing information.

 If the expectation is that we will always be following the Karlsruhe schema
 (with separate ways on each side of the road centerline), then importing
 this addressing data will be next to impossible*.

This would mean we are excluding some features, or some tagging
schemes, in some parts of the world due to disk space or processing
time but not in other parts of the world.  I'm sure we will never have
uniform tagging and uniform data quality everywhere but I still want
to aim at it.

For the record an import I've done had only this left/right - to/from
housenumber information, too, so I have an ugly python script here
ready to throw at this kind of data (after adapting to whatever the
input format is) and I would be happy to do the processing on my PC if
you decide to go this way.  The whole toolchain should still behave
reasonably for data size of TIGER (though obviously I didn't have that
much data)

Cheers

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Marcus Wolschon]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:13 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi everyone,

 I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing data
 in the form of Right/Left From Addr and Right/Left To Addr on each
 street centerline.

Can you identify the location of the Addr for the From/To?
If so it would be easy to calculate interpolation-ways right
and left of the streets using the Karlsruhe Schema.

 Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
 road ways?

No, only in applying it to houses next to the street and special
ways connecting next to the street for interpolating whole
streets of house-numbers at once.

 It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
 separate way just for the addressing information.

I disagree here because of the hundrets of special cases
that absolutely must be handled to be correct that come
from the fact that houses are not usually build in the middle
of a road.

 ...but I might have arrived too late in the argument to say that :-)...

Yes, you are. ;)

PS:
I`m not reading the talk-US but as you crossposted there, so do I.
Please let me know of yet another addressing-schema comes
that is in actual usage to make sure my address-search does
work on all the planet.

Marcus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Ian Dees]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:55 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hiya,

 2009/11/12 Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com:
  I'm looking at some donated street centerline data that has addressing
 data
  in the form of Right/Left From Addr and Right/Left To Addr on each
  street centerline. Is there an accepted way of applying these tags to the
  road ways? It doesn't really make very much sense to create and store a
  separate way just for the addressing information.

 The hope is that local mappers there will be slowly improving imported
 data until there are separate points for every address I think?  Then
 I'd recommend just adding those separate ways and making it easier for
 the mappers to build on this data, instead of making it harder for
 nearly everyone dealing with OSM data by adding a whole different
 addressing scheme.


No, I doubt local mappers will improve the data. I sent this mail because
almost all of the data I've seen available for import in the US (all the way
from individual municipalities to TIGER's shapefiles) has this
left/right-from/to scheme for addressing information.

If the expectation is that we will always be following the Karlsruhe schema
(with separate ways on each side of the road centerline), then importing
this addressing data will be next to impossible*.

-Ian

* Ok, not impossible, but the import size would triple and the CPU time to
compute the new addressing-only ways might make it hard for the regular
mapper to do.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
 No, I doubt local mappers will improve the data.

If that's true (and I'm really not sure if it is), then it really
shouldn't be in OSM in the first place.

 I sent this mail because
 almost all of the data I've seen available for import in the US (all the way
 from individual municipalities to TIGER's shapefiles) has this
 left/right-from/to scheme for addressing information.

 If the expectation is that we will always be following the Karlsruhe schema
 (with separate ways on each side of the road centerline), then importing
 this addressing data will be next to impossible*.

On the other hand, putting the information directly on the way would
be problematic for many reasons.  Ranges might span multiple ways, and
right/left has to be reversed whenever the way is reversed being the
most troublesome.

It probably has to be a relation.  Include a start node, an end node,
and a list of one or more ways (which are connected to form one
logical way).

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Stellan Lagerstrom]

Ian Dees wrote:
 * Ok, not impossible, but the import size would triple and the CPU
 time to compute the new addressing-only ways might make it hard for
 the regular mapper to do.
But for no added code and editor complexity.

IMHO the only decent alternative is using a relation for each address
interpolation-range, with the nodes at the ends of the range and the way
itself as members.
This is roughly half as expensive as the Karlsruhe interpolation ways,
and reduces the visual clutter in the editors. It is also insensitive to
way direction reversal.
One of the worst problems is when you split a way which has more than
one such relation (or even one, if the split is NOT between the two nodes).

Consider a way A from node 1 to 2 to 3; interpolation relation R has
members 1[from], 2[to], A[via] and the range info.
Relation S has members 2[from], 3[to], A[via].
A is split into A and B at node 2. If B gets all tags and relations from
A, things get ugly - R and S now have 2 via members.
So the editor needs to know how to remove the extra relations so that
only ways that contain both the nodes stay members.

Note: This problem already exists in reverse for turn restrictions. Both
the from and to ways are required to end at the via node. So, say,
Market St crosses 1st St. Market and 1st are both split at the
intersection so a no_left_turn can be inserted. If some well-meaning
editor goes and rejoins the two halves of Market, the relation is at
least formally wrong.

/Stellan




___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Apollinaris Schoell]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:


 On the other hand, putting the information directly on the way would
 be problematic for many reasons.  Ranges might span multiple ways, and
 right/left has to be reversed whenever the way is reversed being the
 most troublesome.

 this is enough reason to stay away from such a scheme. if it's too
difficult no one will use it or they will break the data.


 It probably has to be a relation.  Include a start node, an end node,
 and a list of one or more ways (which are connected to form one
 logical way).

  the ways have to be split at the start/end node. the relation members have
to be ordered. too many beginners and medium experienced mappers have
problems to understand such a scheme. how is that easier than the Karlsruhe
scheme?



 ___
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Stellan Lagerstrom]

Ian Dees wrote:
 * Ok, not impossible, but the import size would triple and the CPU
 time to compute the new addressing-only ways might make it hard for
 the regular mapper to do.
But for no added code and editor complexity.

IMHO the only decent alternative is using a relation for each address
interpolation-range, with the nodes at the ends of the range and the way
itself as members.
This is roughly half as expensive as the Karlsruhe interpolation ways,
and reduces the visual clutter in the editors. It is also insensitive to
way direction reversal.
One of the worst problems is when you split a way which has more than
one such relation (or even one, if the split is NOT between the two nodes).

Consider a way A from node 1 to 2 to 3; interpolation relation R has
members 1[from], 2[to], A[via] and the range info.
Relation S has members 2[from], 3[to], A[via].
A is split into A and B at node 2. If B gets all tags and relations from
A, things get ugly - R and S now have 2 via members.
So the editor needs to know how to remove the extra relations so that
only ways that contain both the nodes stay members.

Note: This problem already exists in reverse for turn restrictions. Both
the from and to ways are required to end at the via node. So, say,
Market St crosses 1st St. Market and 1st are both split at the
intersection so a no_left_turn can be inserted. If some well-meaning
editor goes and rejoins the two halves of Market, the relation is at
least formally wrong.

/Stellan





___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Addressing Question

[Ian Dees]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:47 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.comwrote:


 That's a pretty pessimistic view.


Sorry, I am pretty grumpy today. The area I'm looking at actually has quite
a few mappers already, so I imagine this data would probably get updated
quickly.



 For the record an import I've done had only this left/right - to/from
 housenumber information, too, so I have an ugly python script here
 ready to throw at this kind of data (after adapting to whatever the
 input format is) and I would be happy to do the processing on my PC if
 you decide to go this way.  The whole toolchain should still behave
 reasonably for data size of TIGER (though obviously I didn't have that
 much data)


What does the math look like to handle intersections? Curvy roads?
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Simon Ward]

On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 01:17:09PM +, Dave Stubbs wrote:
 It's what happens when you hit reply to all. Get used to it -- it's
 gonna happen to you a lot.

It’s a pity more MUAs don’t have reply to list or take note of the
List-Post header. ☹

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matias D'Ambrosio]

On Sunday 14 December 2008 17:20:52 Simon Ward wrote:
 On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 01:17:09PM +, Dave Stubbs wrote:
  It's what happens when you hit reply to all. Get used to it -- it's
  gonna happen to you a lot.

 It’s a pity more MUAs don’t have reply to list or take note of the
 List-Post header. ☹

 Indeed, Thunderbird 3 supports it, apparently, which should help with a lot 
of OSS-centric lists (other OSS MTUs I know already support it).

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matias D'Ambrosio]

On Friday 12 December 2008 10:23:37 Ed Loach wrote:
 I just spotted the following (video) news report on the BBC website:
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7778886.stm
 I don't believe the featured street has been mapped yet
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.37471lon=-2.3144zoom=15
 but it looks like to have addressing tags on it each house would
 need to be added manually.
 The messiness of UK and other European countries when it comes to numbering 
is old news, is there anything else on that page? I can't watch the video 
(flash video is a broken idea). Obviously, if there is no logical assignment 
of numbers, or one that is broken too often, mapping each number makes sense, 
this thread is not about that.

PS: I'm subscribed to this list, no need to CC me.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Ed Loach]

I just spotted the following (video) news report on the BBC website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7778886.stm
I don't believe the featured street has been mapped yet
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.37471lon=-2.3144zoom=15
but it looks like to have addressing tags on it each house would
need to be added manually.

Ed




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Dave Stubbs]

2008/12/12 Matias D'Ambrosio angas...@gmail.com:
 On Friday 12 December 2008 10:23:37 Ed Loach wrote:
 I just spotted the following (video) news report on the BBC website:
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7778886.stm
 I don't believe the featured street has been mapped yet
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.37471lon=-2.3144zoom=15
 but it looks like to have addressing tags on it each house would
 need to be added manually.
  The messiness of UK and other European countries when it comes to numbering
 is old news, is there anything else on that page? I can't watch the video
 (flash video is a broken idea). Obviously, if there is no logical assignment
 of numbers, or one that is broken too often, mapping each number makes sense,
 this thread is not about that.


OMG! Off-thread-topic shocker! What is this thread about BTW? I seem
to have lost track.



 PS: I'm subscribed to this list, no need to CC me.

It's what happens when you hit reply to all. Get used to it -- it's
gonna happen to you a lot.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Colin McGregor]

On 12/12/08, Matias D'Ambrosio angas...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Friday 12 December 2008 10:23:37 Ed Loach wrote:
 I just spotted the following (video) news report on the BBC website:
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7778886.stm
 I don't believe the featured street has been mapped yet
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.37471lon=-2.3144zoom=15
 but it looks like to have addressing tags on it each house would
 need to be added manually.

  The messiness of UK and other European countries when it comes to numbering
 is old news, is there anything else on that page? I can't watch the video
 (flash video is a broken idea). Obviously, if there is no logical assignment
 of numbers, or one that is broken too often, mapping each number makes
 sense,
 this thread is not about that.

The above video offers what I hope is an extreme example of street
number craziness in the UK (a street with multiple number 2s,
etc..). I gather there is similar messiness in parts of Asia, like
street numbers assigned based on the age of the building...

The best arrangement I have seen for street numbers is in Chicago, IL.
Streets laid out on a grid pattern. On the north/south and east/west
streets there is a number - distance link. If you go from say 1 North
Michigan to 801 North Michigan you will have travelled ~ 1 mile (or if
you go from 1 to 501 you will have travelled ~ 1 kilometer).

Toronto, Ontario things are almost as good. Almost all north/south
street are have the lowest number at the most southern part of the
street (Toronto being unable to go any further south due to Lake
Ontario). On east/west streets the lowest number is almost always the
point closest to Yonge St. (a major north/south street). What Toronto
doesn't have but Chicago does is the link between street numbers and
distance...

 PS: I'm subscribed to this list, no need to CC me.

Colin McGregor

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matias D'Ambrosio]

On Friday 12 December 2008 11:17:09 Dave Stubbs wrote:
 OMG! Off-thread-topic shocker! What is this thread about BTW? I seem
 to have lost track.
 Street number craziness. By now it has degenerated into look at this neat 
grid and look at this crazy swirling random number maze, still useful 
since we get to know wildly different areas (which comes in handy later, 
knowledge always does).

  PS: I'm subscribed to this list, no need to CC me.

 It's what happens when you hit reply to all. Get used to it -- it's
 gonna happen to you a lot.
 I know :) And cars don't brake so I can cross the street when they are 
supposed to, I still yell at them and do my best to modify their incorrect 
conduct.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matias D'Ambrosio]

On Friday 12 December 2008 17:34:39 Colin McGregor wrote:
 The best arrangement I have seen for street numbers is in Chicago, IL.
 Streets laid out on a grid pattern. On the north/south and east/west
 streets there is a number - distance link. If you go from say 1 North
 Michigan to 801 North Michigan you will have travelled ~ 1 mile (or if
 you go from 1 to 501 you will have travelled ~ 1 kilometer).

 Toronto, Ontario things are almost as good. Almost all north/south
 street are have the lowest number at the most southern part of the
 street (Toronto being unable to go any further south due to Lake
 Ontario). On east/west streets the lowest number is almost always the
 point closest to Yonge St. (a major north/south street). What Toronto
 doesn't have but Chicago does is the link between street numbers and
 distance...
 Ah, both sound very similar to our system. In Argentina, if you want to go to 
the main city square, you just have to follow the numbers to 0, it's not the 
fastest way, but if you're lost... Here, Avenida Colon 2100 would be 2.1km 
from the street's starting point (which is the main square in my city).

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Shaun McDonald]

On 10 Dec 2008, at 23:04, Matias D'Ambrosio wrote:

 On Wednesday 10 December 2008 15:12:46 Shaun McDonald wrote:

 South Bridge in Edinburgh has the numbers run up one side, then back
 down the other.
 I just looked at Edinburgh and all I can say is, I'm sorry! Looks  
 like a mess
 to map, excellent work :)

I'm sure the people who have been mapping Edinburgh and similar such  
cities will be happy to hear that.



 I find it very strange that you city blocks are so consistently 100
 metres by 100 metres. In my experience they are some random size.
 Consistent block sizes and grid road layouts are just so strange.  
 It's
 trunk and branch cul-de-sacs that are the foray of the planners.
 I guess I just want you to hate me a little, here is my city, we often
 complain about the poor quality of the grid:

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-38.7142lon=-62.2544zoom=13layers=0B00FTF


I suppose I'm that used to wiggly roads that it would be strange to do  
some grid based city.

 Pay no attention to the weird mix of primary/secondary/tertiary,  
 we're soon
 having a meeting to improve that.

On a more serious note about addressing, the Karlsruhe Schema would  
still fit your scenario. You can interpolate along each block, and  
assume that there is no guarantee that every building number exists.  
Then for extra detail, you can mark every house in. I don't see any  
reason why it wouldn't work.

Shaun


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matias D'Ambrosio]

On Thursday 11 December 2008 07:05:58 you wrote:
 On a more serious note about addressing, the Karlsruhe Schema would
 still fit your scenario. You can interpolate along each block, and
 assume that there is no guarantee that every building number exists.
 Then for extra detail, you can mark every house in. I don't see any
 reason why it wouldn't work.
 It would work, it's just a lot of unneeded work. Sort of like using assembler 
to get a directory listing when you can just use 'ls'. It's hard enough to 
get mappers (I did 90% of the work in that area on my own), and the karlsruhe 
schema isn't a good fit with the use of the data, either, since people use it 
as a grid with a proper numbering scheme. So it's more work to input the data 
and to process it later. There are people already (myself included) working 
on rendering and routing taking advantage of numbers (without which routing 
is not useful here).

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matias D'Ambrosio]

On Tuesday 09 December 2008 11:37:13 Frederik Ramm wrote:
 Hi,

 Matt Amos wrote:
  sure, editor support isn't 100% yet, but why re-create a poor-man's
  relations with name-based references, when we already have proper
  relations?

 In my eyes an address is not a relation. It comes close, but a house
 *can* have an address that has nothing to do with the road that passes
 it.
 In your country, perhaps. In my country, that's EXACTLY what the address is. 
The address is the street and distance from the street's starting point, in 
metres.

 The address 31 So-and-So Street does not mean that this is the 
 31st house on So-and-So Street, it doesn't even necessarily mean that
 the entrance is via So-and-So Street or that it is in the vicinity of
 30, 32, or 33...
 In my country, which has a very sane and predictable scheme, there is usually 
a central square which is the centre of the city, from which the main streets 
start, and from these start other streets (depending on terrain and proper 
planning it might end up as a perfect grid, cf. La Plata, Argentina). 31 
would in fact be before 32 and after 30.
 There may be other countries using the same/similar system. I believe the USA 
is one? And probably a few other countries in South America. I'm guessing 
being 'new' countries helps keeping things sane, we're still not overcome by 
entropy :)

 I view an address as an individual attribute of a 
 certain property that is often similar to addresses of neighbouring
 properties, but need not be.
 Cultural issue, no doubt. One map, two systems. Kidding :D
 I do think we need more than one system, and people have to stop imposing 
*their* view/system on other countries.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Ed Loach]

  In your country, perhaps. In my country, that's EXACTLY what
 the address is.
 The address is the street and distance from the street's
 starting point, in
 metres.

What happens if two houses are built facing each other on opposite
sides of the street? Wouldn't they get assigned the same number? Or
does someone arbitrarily decide which is closer and increase or
decrease one of the numbers by 1?

Ed



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[D Tucny]

2008/12/10 Ed Loach [EMAIL PROTECTED]

   In your country, perhaps. In my country, that's EXACTLY what
  the address is.
  The address is the street and distance from the street's
  starting point, in
  metres.

 What happens if two houses are built facing each other on opposite
 sides of the street? Wouldn't they get assigned the same number? Or
 does someone arbitrarily decide which is closer and increase or
 decrease one of the numbers by 1?


With such a structured system, do you think the planning codes would allow
this? I guess they have to be offset by at least 1m...

d
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matias D'Ambrosio]

On Wednesday 10 December 2008 12:04:13 you wrote:
   In your country, perhaps. In my country, that's EXACTLY what
  the address is.
  The address is the street and distance from the street's
  starting point, in
  metres.

 What happens if two houses are built facing each other on opposite
 sides of the street? Wouldn't they get assigned the same number? Or
 does someone arbitrarily decide which is closer and increase or
 decrease one of the numbers by 1?
 Hmm, strange country you live in if houses are 1 metre wide, houses here are 
usually 10 metres wide. And each side of the street has even or odd numbers, 
although unusual (I can't think of any such street at this moment) it's 
possible to have them mixed. Each house has an assigned number, which I think 
can be chosen by the owner (I don't know exactly when it's chosen, and 
whether it can be changed, or how easily), that number is within the range 
the house occupies.
 What's also important, is the usage. It is very common to say Alem Avenue 
1200 to refer to a corner or the block face that has the range 1200-1299. 
Using Alem Avenue and San Juan Street is unusual unless both are well known 
streets. Each city block is 100 metres by 100 metres, so counting blocks is 
helpful if there are no signs on the corners and houses don't have numbers on 
the front (or they are not easily visible from a car), which is not uncommon, 
in fact I used this method of finding a house just last week. Mighty 
convenient, let me tell you :)

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Shaun McDonald]

On 10 Dec 2008, at 16:41, Matias D'Ambrosio wrote:


On Wednesday 10 December 2008 12:04:13 you wrote:

In your country, perhaps. In my country, that's EXACTLY what
the address is.
The address is the street and distance from the street's
starting point, in
metres.


What happens if two houses are built facing each other on opposite
sides of the street? Wouldn't they get assigned the same number? Or
does someone arbitrarily decide which is closer and increase or
decrease one of the numbers by 1?
Hmm, strange country you live in if houses are 1 metre wide, houses  
here are
usually 10 metres wide. And each side of the street has even or odd  
numbers,
although unusual (I can't think of any such street at this moment)  
it's

possible to have them mixed.


South Bridge in Edinburgh has the numbers run up one side, then back  
down the other. I have come across some residential streets that are  
numbered all the way around. It's very rare around here for houses to  
be numbered based on the end of the road. What happens when you extend  
that end of the road?



Each house has an assigned number, which I think
can be chosen by the owner (I don't know exactly when it's chosen, and
whether it can be changed, or how easily), that number is within the  
range

the house occupies.
What's also important, is the usage. It is very common to say Alem  
Avenue
1200 to refer to a corner or the block face that has the range  
1200-1299.
Using Alem Avenue and San Juan Street is unusual unless both are  
well known
streets. Each city block is 100 metres by 100 metres, so counting  
blocks is
helpful if there are no signs on the corners and houses don't have  
numbers on
the front (or they are not easily visible from a car), which is not  
uncommon,

in fact I used this method of finding a house just last week. Mighty
convenient, let me tell you :)


I find it very strange that you city blocks are so consistently 100  
metres by 100 metres. In my experience they are some random size.  
Consistent block sizes and grid road layouts are just so strange. It's  
trunk and branch cul-de-sacs that are the foray of the planners.


Shaun



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matias D'Ambrosio]

On Wednesday 10 December 2008 15:12:46 you wrote:
 South Bridge in Edinburgh has the numbers run up one side, then back
 down the other. I have come across some residential streets that are
 numbered all the way around. It's very rare around here for houses to
 be numbered based on the end of the road. What happens when you extend
 that end of the road?
 No idea, around here they are numbered from the start :) If you go past the 
start of a street, another street starts, so it can always be extended at the 
end.

 I find it very strange that you city blocks are so consistently 100
 metres by 100 metres. In my experience they are some random size.
 Consistent block sizes and grid road layouts are just so strange. It's
 trunk and branch cul-de-sacs that are the foray of the planners.
 Oh, no, that's the ideal, only a few cities are close to perfect. There are 
certainly forks, curves and cul de sacs, but they are the exception, not the 
rule. I have seen areas of Italy for example that don't seem to have a single 
stretch of road that's straight for more than 50 metres.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matias D'Ambrosio]

On Wednesday 10 December 2008 15:12:46 Shaun McDonald wrote:

 South Bridge in Edinburgh has the numbers run up one side, then back
 down the other.
 I just looked at Edinburgh and all I can say is, I'm sorry! Looks like a mess 
to map, excellent work :)

 I find it very strange that you city blocks are so consistently 100
 metres by 100 metres. In my experience they are some random size.
 Consistent block sizes and grid road layouts are just so strange. It's
 trunk and branch cul-de-sacs that are the foray of the planners.
 I guess I just want you to hate me a little, here is my city, we often 
complain about the poor quality of the grid:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-38.7142lon=-62.2544zoom=13layers=0B00FTF

 Pay no attention to the weird mix of primary/secondary/tertiary, we're soon 
having a meeting to improve that.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

 that sounds elegant and solves the problem I had yesterday when trying
 to add some street numbers to a street made of many small ways that
 branch from the main one, i.e. something like this:
 
   | |
   |  |  |
 ---+--++-+--
   |
 
 there is now at least one such relation on the map :)

Congratulations on constructing something that is likely to break as 
soon as the first inexperienced mapper touches it ;-) it would have been 
perfectly ok to just add nodes for the individual houses and tag them 
with the full address data - no relations, no headache, and easy to 
understand for everyone.

 An even better alternative would probably be to add the collected
 street relation to the associatedStreet one, but I'm not sure there is
 support for relations in relations in the api / editors

JOSM does support relations within relations but there is still a bug 
that causes problems if both the containing and the contained relation 
are created in the same session.

Still my advice is not to use relations wherever there is an easier way. 
One set of address tags per address, nothing could be easier, no 
relations required.

Bye
Frederik


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Dave Stubbs]

 sure, editor support isn't 100% yet, but why re-create a poor-man's
 relations with name-based references, when we already have proper
 relations?


Because editor support is almost non-existent, and exceptionally confusing :-)

The advantage of using addr:street is that it does just work. The only
problem being that JOSM isn't clever enough at the moment to
autocomplete the field based on existing streets in the area. It
actually should be a drop down combo box letting you select the
relevant street. And it's entirely possible to cleverly rename local
objects' addr:street when the street name changes. Of course once
you've gone to all that trouble you might as well have made the
backend use a relation instead.

I like the clean relation data model, but find the addr:street thing
much easier at the moment.
Maybe I'll add an addressing button (sorry, I meant obscure keypress
:-P) to Potlatch sometime then there'll be no excuses left.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Elena of Valhalla]

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 [...]
 Congratulations on constructing something that is likely to break as soon as
 the first inexperienced mapper touches it ;-) it would have been perfectly
 ok to just add nodes for the individual houses and tag them with the full
 address data - no relations, no headache, and easy to understand for
 everyone.

a name based approach would be as likely to break, and it wouldn't
even give any warning like the relation approach does

 An even better alternative would probably be to add the collected
 street relation to the associatedStreet one, but I'm not sure there is
 support for relations in relations in the api / editors
 JOSM does support relations within relations but there is still a bug that
 causes problems if both the containing and the contained relation are
 created in the same session.

that will have to wait, then, I suppose

 Still my advice is not to use relations wherever there is an easier way.

Actually, I don't understand what's hard with the relations: sure it
is painful to add them with no autocompletion in josm, but that's just
a minor editor issue that will be hopefully fixed.

Maybe it is because I started mapping with the 5 api already in use,
so relations were just a fact and not something new that I had to
learn and changed the way I was used to map.

  One
 set of address tags per address, nothing could be easier, no relations
 required.

easier? maybe, but a maintenance nightmare

the street I did yesterday was just a small test, but the next one I'm
going to try is a 200+ houses one: i'm not going to do it at once, so
I can't just insert all of the data and be done with it, I would have
to painfully copy it at least once per session, hoping I'm not adding
some spelling error

-- 
Elena of Valhalla

homepage: http://www.trueelena.org
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Richard Fairhurst]

Dave Stubbs wrote:
 I like the clean relation data model, but find the addr:street 
 thing much easier at the moment.
 Maybe I'll add an addressing button (sorry, I meant obscure 
 keypress :-P) to Potlatch sometime then there'll be no excuses left.

When this accursed API 0.6 is out of the way, I'll be (finally) starting on
the new tagging panels and stuff for Potlatch so you won't need any obscure
keypresses. Well, ok, not many.

cheers
Richard
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/addressing-tp20903650p20913252.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Elena of Valhalla]

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Dave Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 sure, editor support isn't 100% yet, but why re-create a poor-man's
 relations with name-based references, when we already have proper
 relations?
 Because editor support is almost non-existent, and exceptionally confusing :-)

then we should fix the editor(s), not add poor data

 The advantage of using addr:street is that it does just work. The only
 problem being that JOSM isn't clever enough at the moment to
 [...] Of course once
 you've gone to all that trouble you might as well have made the
 backend use a relation instead.

that's exactly the point: the addr:street solution would need quite
some ad hoc work in the editors to become really feasible for ease of
adding, maintenance and robustness; the relation solution would need
some work in the editors that will benefit also when working with
other relations

-- 
Elena of Valhalla

homepage: http://www.trueelena.org
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matt Amos]

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Dave Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 sure, editor support isn't 100% yet, but why re-create a poor-man's
 relations with name-based references, when we already have proper
 relations?

 Because editor support is almost non-existent, and exceptionally confusing :-)

so lets fix the real problem! i'm sure everyone would like better
relation support in all editors :-)

 The advantage of using addr:street is that it does just work.

except when it doesn't - e.g: misspelled streets, deleted in use
streets, etc...

 The only
 problem being that JOSM isn't clever enough at the moment to
 autocomplete the field based on existing streets in the area. It
 actually should be a drop down combo box letting you select the
 relevant street. And it's entirely possible to cleverly rename local
 objects' addr:street when the street name changes. Of course once
 you've gone to all that trouble you might as well have made the
 backend use a relation instead.

exactly! so why construct such a relation internally, where only JOSM
can use it?

 I like the clean relation data model, but find the addr:street thing
 much easier at the moment.

it is much easier at the moment, and supported by OSM inspector,
etc... which makes relatedStreet a hard sell, but i think it really is
the best way to do it.

addr:street=Foo on an addressable element is basically the same thing
as route=LCN:4 on a way. and i thought it was well understood why
using this method for routes is A Bad Idea, even if it is easier.

cheers,

matt

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Dave Stubbs]

 addr:street=Foo on an addressable element is basically the same thing
 as route=LCN:4 on a way. and i thought it was well understood why
 using this method for routes is A Bad Idea, even if it is easier.


Actually that has far more to do with having bus 37, bus 337, bus 270,
bus 44, bus N44, ncn 4, ncn 5, lcn 37, lcn 3, lcn 5, lcn 25 all
sharing the same way (just a random example, don't try to find it!).
Cramming all of that into one tag would become an exercise in text
parsing, and some of the solutions on offer involved building turing
complete languages into the format. I don't really consider it the
same as addr:street which mainly has issues of integrity and
duplication (with maybe the added bonus of having to find the street
object), neither of which were so much of a problem with routes.

Anyway, the primary reason people weren't using relations (when they
actually existed of course) was that editor support sucked. Hence why
the relation handling in Potlatch came in... it's no accident it's
geared primarily for adding routes.
Before that ncn, rcn, lcn tags were generally the way to go for
bicycle routes. And if you still find it easier then I say go for it.
It's a wiki, someone else'll fix it :-)

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Matt Amos wrote:
 except when it doesn't - e.g: misspelled streets, deleted in use
 streets, etc...

A little redundancy doesn't hurt - on the contrary, it makes spotting 
mistakes easier. And about deleted in use streets: If a house has a 
certain address then it has that address, even if the street which used 
to pass by the house is physically removed. There is no automatism in 
the real world that links house addresses to streets, so why should 
there be in OSM? If you remove the road next to a house node with an 
address, then the address will of course remain unchanged until this is 
done explicitly... just like in the real world.

Bye
Frederik


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matt Amos]

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Matt Amos wrote:
 sure, editor support isn't 100% yet, but why re-create a poor-man's
 relations with name-based references, when we already have proper
 relations?

 In my eyes an address is not a relation. It comes close, but a house *can*
 have an address that has nothing to do with the road that passes it.

exactly - so why say that the nearest road with a particular name is
the addressable road? better to indicate exactly which way is the
addressing element and leave routing for the via elements.

 The
 address 31 So-and-So Street does not mean that this is the 31st house on
 So-and-So Street, it doesn't even necessarily mean that the entrance is via
 So-and-So Street or that it is in the vicinity of 30, 32, or 33... I view an
 address as an individual attribute of a certain property that is often
 similar to addresses of neighbouring properties, but need not be.

this is not an argument against using relations. this is only an
argument against assuming that the nearest street is the addressing
street, which i am not advocating.

cheers,

matt

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Dave Stubbs]

2008/12/9 Elena of Valhalla [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Dave Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 sure, editor support isn't 100% yet, but why re-create a poor-man's
 relations with name-based references, when we already have proper
 relations?
 Because editor support is almost non-existent, and exceptionally confusing 
 :-)

 then we should fix the editor(s), not add poor data


It's not poor data.
It's a different data model. If you want to argue the data model is
inferior then you have a whole range of good arguments to chose from.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)]

Frederik Ramm wrote:
Sent: 09 December 2008 1:37 PM
To: Matt Amos
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

Hi,

Matt Amos wrote:
 sure, editor support isn't 100% yet, but why re-create a poor-man's
 relations with name-based references, when we already have proper
 relations?

In my eyes an address is not a relation. It comes close, but a house
*can* have an address that has nothing to do with the road that passes
it. The address 31 So-and-So Street does not mean that this is the
31st house on So-and-So Street, it doesn't even necessarily mean that
the entrance is via So-and-So Street or that it is in the vicinity of
30, 32, or 33... I view an address as an individual attribute of a
certain property that is often similar to addresses of neighbouring
properties, but need not be.

I've spotted that in the UK the street name really isn't anything to do with
the street per se. In many cases the street sign only appears at the
start/end of a run of properties. Historically it was a way of relating the
property to a location. SO taking that a step further its really the street
that should be related to the property and not the other way around.

Cheers

Andy



Bye
Frederik


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.15/1838 - Release Date: 08/12/2008
6:16 PM


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Matt Amos wrote:
 exactly - so why say that the nearest road with a particular name is
 the addressable road? better to indicate exactly which way is the
 addressing element and leave routing for the via elements.

No, not indicate which way is the addressing element (because the 
object may even have a street name without the street existing in OSM) - 
simply put the street name with the object and that's it. In my eyes, 
the address is a name, not a pointer to an object that has addressing 
quality.

Bye
Frederik


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Matt Amos]

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Matt Amos wrote:
 except when it doesn't - e.g: misspelled streets, deleted in use
 streets, etc...

 A little redundancy doesn't hurt - on the contrary, it makes spotting
 mistakes easier.

and prevention is better than a cure. don't spot the mistakes - use
the API's features to help prevent their occurrence.

 And about deleted in use streets: If a house has a
 certain address then it has that address, even if the street which used to
 pass by the house is physically removed. There is no automatism in the real
 world that links house addresses to streets, so why should there be in OSM?
 If you remove the road next to a house node with an address, then the
 address will of course remain unchanged until this is done explicitly...
 just like in the real world.

there are two uses for addressing: navigation and geo-location. the
situation you describe would make navigation very difficult, so i
think it does not happen much in the real world.

oh hais, my house address is so-and-so street, but that doesn't exist
any more. please go via such-and-such road.?

the two tagging methods are essentially the same (i.e: they both link
elements to a way - and not necessarily the closest way) and result,
after parsing, in essentially the same data model. the fundamental
differences are:

1) the relatedStreet cannot refer to streets that do not exist and
will prevent anyone attempting (possibly accidentally) to do this.
2) the addr:street represents address information textually, and
therefore requires searching (which may fail, or may result in
unintended items found) to lookup the street.

i prefer using relations, but clearly both methods have merits. how
hard is it to support both?

cheers,

matt

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Jochen Topf]

On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 03:00:04PM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
 Matt Amos wrote:
  exactly - so why say that the nearest road with a particular name is
  the addressable road? better to indicate exactly which way is the
  addressing element and leave routing for the via elements.
 
 No, not indicate which way is the addressing element (because the 
 object may even have a street name without the street existing in OSM) - 
 simply put the street name with the object and that's it. In my eyes, 
 the address is a name, not a pointer to an object that has addressing 
 quality.

The Czech Republic seems to be one of the busiest users of the Karlsruhe
model. They seem to have imported house numbers from somewhere as there
are many cases where there are house number nodes, but the corresponding
street is missing.

Jochen
-- 
Jochen Topf  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.remote.org/jochen/  +49-721-388298


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Ed Loach]

 i prefer using relations, but clearly both methods have merits.
 how
 hard is it to support both?

Having read this discussion I know of a location locally where both
methods are probably required. There is a road called New Way
where the houses on one side actually have postal addresses of
Eastern Promenade, although there is no vehicular access to the
front of these houses. Tagging the nodes with addr:street=Eastern
Promenade, but then using a relation to link the nodes with New
Way seems the perfect solution. At present I've only added the way
with a note about the properties on one side having a different
street address, rather than actually marking any of them.

Ed



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Matt Amos wrote:
 sure, editor support isn't 100% yet, but why re-create a poor-man's
 relations with name-based references, when we already have proper
 relations?

In my eyes an address is not a relation. It comes close, but a house 
*can* have an address that has nothing to do with the road that passes 
it. The address 31 So-and-So Street does not mean that this is the 
31st house on So-and-So Street, it doesn't even necessarily mean that 
the entrance is via So-and-So Street or that it is in the vicinity of 
30, 32, or 33... I view an address as an individual attribute of a 
certain property that is often similar to addresses of neighbouring 
properties, but need not be.

Bye
Frederik


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] addressing

[Richard Fairhurst]

SteveC wrote:
 needs a simple how to do addressing in potlatch video a-la 
 the old ones I did, as if you ignore relations it is essentially trivial

I'll be committing some new presets next week with all the fields ready and
waiting.

cheers
Richard
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/addressing-tp20903650p20912791.html
Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk