Re: [Talk-GB] Dual Aperture Postboxes

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On 2 October 2015 at 23:18, SK53  wrote:
> I noted today a number of post boxes with two apertures, one for stamped
> mail, the other for franked mail. Each side of the box has a separate plate
> & distinct refs.I would have expected these to have been mapped as  "ref=RF1
> 1;RF1 2", with some explanatory text to explain that this is one & the same
> post-box.
>
> I find that one such has been mapped as two nodes placed directly on top of
> each other:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1149760519
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1149765602
>
> This is not wholly unreasonable, there are functionally two different
> posting places located in a single post box. It also shows that the OSM tag
> name which is perfectly accurate about 99.99% of the time, isn't totally
> precise.

I've always mapped dual-aperture boxes as a single node, with ref="RF1
1;RF1 2" (and post_box:apertures=2) as you suggested. I've done this
on the grounds that it's a single physical object, albeit with two
slots that could have different attributes. If the two slots have very
different properties, then I could see there would be a case for
mapping as two nodes, but I think that's probably a bit over the top
in general. e.g. if one slot does first-class and the other second,
then there's really not that much difference as far as users are
concerned between that case and the case of a normal box that just
accepts both mail types in a single slot. However, if there are
different collection times for the different types of mail in the
different slots then it would get harder to tag properly, so we might
need to revisit things if that ever arises...

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker
http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Dual Aperture Postboxes

[SK53]

I noted today a number of post boxes with two apertures, one for stamped
mail, the other for franked mail. Each side of the box has a separate plate
& distinct refs.I would have expected these to have been mapped as
"ref=RF1 1;RF1 2", with some explanatory text to explain that this is one &
the same post-box.

I find that one such has been mapped as two nodes placed directly on top of
each other:

   - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1149760519
   - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1149765602

This is not wholly unreasonable, there are functionally two different
posting places located in a single post box. It also shows that the OSM tag
name which is perfectly accurate about 99.99% of the time, isn't totally
precise.

(Complete aside: This is the sort of PITA I was always experiencing in
db-design; and equally business folk always will tell you the equivalent of
"all post from one post box is treated the same". In the extreme form you
get US software firms writing banking systems which don't acknowledge that
more than one currency exists).

Anyway I look to Robert to cut this Gordian Knot one way or the other.

Jerry
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb