On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 19:16:26 -0500, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Dave Hansen <[email protected]> wrote: >> There's nothing wrong with doing point-level address imports. The only >> thing I would suggest is ensuring that we connect those points ways or >> whatever to the roads that represent them somehow. > > 1) Why? > > 2) Are you planning on doing that with the TIGER address import? > >> One way to do that is relations. > > Relations could connect the points with "ways", but without a whole > lot of work they're not going to be able to connect them with "roads", > because a single road can consist of many different ways. Until some > sort of relation is invented to connect multiple ways to a single > road, the best way to connect a point with a road is by using the name > of that road.
That would be relations tagged type=route route=road in other parts of the world. (I'm using these heavily in the import of TMC location-codes for traffic-announcements.) However the existing relations for connecting house-numbers connect them to ways, not to roads. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema#Using_Relations_to_associate_house_and_street_.28optional.29 That is not the way where the access to a building is but the way the number belongs to. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema#Giving_hints_about_the_road-access_.28optional.29 Marcus _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
