Hi Andrea (and Pieren): I agree with the fact that you loose information when ignoring those addresses. It's quite clear, and sorry not to have mentioned it on my previous email.
What I tried to say is that it seemed to me that those address nodes (for example 4a to 4t) seemed to belong to the 4 building. The fact that they were stretching so far made me think they belonged to the same building, and that they were entrances inside it, so it would be wrong to import them that way. But with your clarification of belonging to each of the garages, it makes more sense for me now. Thanks for the aclaration. Cheers, Rafael. On 21/11/14 14:11, Andrea Musuruane wrote: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > 2014-11-21 16:22 GMT+01:00 Andrea Musuruane <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>: > > I think it is plain wrong to delete subordinates. > > > > +1, but I think Rafael has a point by spotting this particular place > in the data, it looks a bit fishy, the best solution would be to > have a survey on that spot to see what is really there - and where. > > > I can already tell you what's there - a raw of garages each one with an > address. > > BR, > > Andrea > -- Twitter: http://twitter.com/ravilacoya -------------------------------- Por favor, non me envíe documentos con extensións .doc, .docx, .xls, .xlsx, .ppt, .pptx, aínda podendoo facer, non os abro. Atendendo á lexislación vixente, empregue formatos estándares e abertos. http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument#Tipos_de_ficheros _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
