Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 05.12.2012 01:19, Tobias Knerr wrote: Really no need for relations here. It may not be strictly necessary, but it is still an option to consider. Representing addresses as a relation lets you express: * ... multiple objects that have the same address That address can be tagged on the surr

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 5 December 2012 14:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm : > >> 2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm : > >> > I just pointed out two practical problems with overloading addresses > >> > upon POIs. My main argument is that I see addresses as a separate map > feature > >> > in their own

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm : >> 2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm : >> > I just pointed out two practical problems with overloading addresses >> > upon POIs. My main argument is that I see addresses as a separate map >> > feature >> > in their own right. >> +1, I agree with that, but isn't the logical cons

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 5 December 2012 10:19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm : > > I just pointed out two practical problems with overloading addresses upon > > POIs. My main argument is that I see addresses as a separate map feature > in > > their own right. > > > +1, I agree with that, but i

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm : > I just pointed out two practical problems with overloading addresses upon > POIs. My main argument is that I see addresses as a separate map feature in > their own right. +1, I agree with that, but isn't the logical consequence to tag them on polygons and not on node

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Markus Lindholm wrote: > My main argument is that I see addresses as a separate map feature in > their own right. An further more as there can be a M-N relationship between > addresses and POIs I think it's a bad idea to overload them on a single > element. +1 For

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 5 December 2012 05:56, Peter Wendorff wrote: > > I don't see why that's more a problem in one node than in different ones - > except that the current rendering rules don't fit here. In that your > argumentation sounds much like a tagging-for-the-renderer-argumentation. > I just pointed out tw

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

Am 04.12.2012 22:27, schrieb Markus Lindholm: On 4 December 2012 17:44, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: 2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm mailto:markus.lindh...@gmail.com>>: >> > it would make it impossible to render addresses and POIs at the same >> > time.

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 04.12.2012 13:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm : >> If there really is a need to bind address and POI together then create a >> relation for that. > > -1, this would be breaking a fly on the wheel (or shooting with > cannons on sparrows as we say in Germany). Really no

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

Keep in mind the case of multistory buildings. In this case, the polygons on the different levels are overlapping. The indoor mapping proposals have a level relation in which to hold the polygons for the different levels. In an indoor formalism I would label the unit polygon with the unit portion

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 4 December 2012 17:44, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm : > >> > it would make it impossible to render addresses and POIs at the same > >> > time. > >> this depends entirely on your rendering rules. > > How would you devise a rendering rule that makes an intelligible map w

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm : >> > it would make it impossible to render addresses and POIs at the same >> > time. >> this depends entirely on your rendering rules. > How would you devise a rendering rule that makes an intelligible map with > two icons mapped on top of each other on the same spot?

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 4 December 2012 13:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm : > > In my book addresses are features in their own right and should not be > mixed > > in the same element as amenities or shops. The first problem would be > that > > it would make it impossible to render addresses

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm : > In my book addresses are features in their own right and should not be mixed > in the same element as amenities or shops. The first problem would be that > it would make it impossible to render addresses and POIs at the same time. this depends entirely on your render

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

2012/12/4 Ronnie Soak : > 2012/12/4 Martin Koppenhoefer : > >> >> if you see the address as "feature" it should be an area and not a >> node, but if you add it to a POI I'd see it as an attribute and there >> is no problem in adding it multiple times. Putting an address-node on >> a building-outlin

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 4 December 2012 12:22, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Am 04/dic/2012 um 11:16 schrieb Pieren : > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > > > >> The only use of separate address nodes by now is that they make Mapnik > >> display a house number. But speaking of Mapnik... if

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

2012/12/4 Martin Koppenhoefer : > > if you see the address as "feature" it should be an area and not a > node, but if you add it to a POI I'd see it as an attribute and there > is no problem in adding it multiple times. Putting an address-node on > a building-outline to mark an entrance seems odd,

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

2012/12/4 Friedrich Volkmann : > Pieren wrote: >> One principle I like in OSM is "one feature, one OSM element": >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element > An address is not a feature. An address is an attribute of a feature. An > address never exists on its own in the re

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

Am 04/dic/2012 um 11:16 schrieb Pieren : > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > >> The only use of separate address nodes by now is that they make Mapnik >> display a house number. But speaking of Mapnik... if there are 5 POIs in a >> house, and Mapnik has no signature for

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

Pieren wrote: One principle I like in OSM is "one feature, one OSM element": http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element An address is not a feature. An address is an attribute of a feature. An address never exists on its own in the real world. There cannot be an addres

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

2012/12/4 Pieren : > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > >> The only use of separate address nodes by now is that they make Mapnik >> display a house number. But speaking of Mapnik... if there are 5 POIs in a >> house, and Mapnik has no signature for those POIs, it displays

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > The only use of separate address nodes by now is that they make Mapnik > display a house number. But speaking of Mapnik... if there are 5 POIs in a > house, and Mapnik has no signature for those POIs, it displays the house > number for e

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 02.12.2012 18:33, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2012/12/2 Kytömaa Lauri: Just a reminder that in many countries buildings can have several addresses, each address on different streets; none of the addresses is a "primary" address, and all staircases of said building are referenced just with a

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On 02.12.2012 16:26, Kytömaa Lauri wrote: Ronnie Soak wrote: Several addresses per building: addr:* tags on entrance nodes along the building outline. Just a reminder that in many countries buildings can have several addresses, each address on different streets; none of the addresses is a "p

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

On Sun, 2 Dec 2012, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/12/2 Kytömaa Lauri : > > Just a reminder that in many countries buildings can have several > > addresses, each address on different streets; none of the addresses is > > a "primary" address, and all staircases of said building are > > reference

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

2012/12/2 Kytömaa Lauri : > Just a reminder that in many countries buildings can have several addresses, > each address on different streets; none of the addresses is a "primary" > address, and all staircases of said building are referenced just with a > letter after any of the possible street a

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

Ronnie Soak wrote: >Several addresses per building: addr:* tags on entrance nodes along the >building outline. Just a reminder that in many countries buildings can have several addresses, each address on different streets; none of the addresses is a "primary" address, and all staircases of said

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

Hi Rob, We already had this discussion some time ago. There wasn't a complete consensus on the matter, but here is how I tag now: One amenity per building: the addr: tags and the amenity tags on the building outline. One or multiple entrance nodes on the outline. Several amenities per building,

[Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

-- Forwarding message from talk as more appropriate to tagging list -- Hi, A mapper who is new to my area is interested in mapping disabled access at a micro level. Specifically he would like to achieve door-to-door mapping for key shops and amenities, and has made a good start by