> From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[email protected]] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Imports] King County Address Imports > > On Mon, 17 Dec 2012, Richard Welty wrote: > > > On 12/17/12 4:38 PM, Christian Quest wrote: > > > Why not use associatedStreet relations ? They are really convenient > > > in this case of import... most tags can move to the relation and you > > > can keep only the addr:housenumber on each node/way. > > > > > how well supported are they by data consumers? the address data will > > be important in nav applications like OsmAnd and mkgmap. the whole > > world isn't just the web site and nominatum > > I've always done both, as thats what JOSMs terracer plugin[1] did. > AFAIK, the "Karlsruhe scheme" also accounts for this.
As of about a month ago there was a 10:1 preference in the database for addr:street tags over membership in an associatedStreet relation. Anecdotal evidence is that the relations are more fragile and prone to breaking. I seldom see associatedStreet relations in North America, so only using addr:* tags is in accordance with how you'd normally manually map. _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
