Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com 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 me, it was also obvious that the address is its own feature and not an attribute to e,g, a shop. Shops can change quickly. Addresses are more stable. You may also have shops in ground floor and private flats/appartments in upper floors. I don't see why the building address for those individuals should be identified by the shop attributes in ground floor. I don't think we need a relation if the link is defined spatially by the building area. Of course, they are simple cases where the building is one single address for only one single building (a shop or a residence building) in which case we can merge all attributes into a single node or closed way. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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 nodes? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
On 5 December 2012 10:19, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote: 2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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 nodes? I don't see that. Polygons are more laborious to create than a node and don't provide for a M-N relationships between addresses and POIs. /Markus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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 nodes? I don't see that. Polygons are more laborious to create than a node and don't provide for a M-N relationships between addresses and POIs. So your conclusion is to map addresses as nodes because it is less work than a polygon (of which you might already have a preliminary version: the building outline), and than you suggest to create relations between this address-node and every POI with this address? cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
On 5 December 2012 14:23, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote: 2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 2012/12/5 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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 nodes? I don't see that. Polygons are more laborious to create than a node and don't provide for a M-N relationships between addresses and POIs. So your conclusion is to map addresses as nodes because it is less work than a polygon (of which you might already have a preliminary version: the building outline), and than you suggest to create relations between this address-node and every POI with this address? It all depends on the level of ambition. It should be easy and quick to do the most basic mapping. Complex mapping should preferably use the artifacts from basic level as building blocks. The following are perhaps the logical steps in mapping addresses from simple to complex micro-mapping. - One building - one address. The address can be placed directly on the building polygon if one doesn't care to create a separate node inside the building. - As previous step but with knowledge about where the entrance is. Place a node on the building outline with address and entrance tags - Many addresses on the building, just add nodes - Add POIs that you care about - If you think it's important to bind a POI to an address then create a relation for it. Unique benefits with relations: - Possible to handle M-N relationships - Possible to convey what kind of relationship it is between POI and address, if it is a entrance for customers or customers in wheelchair or staff or deliveries or other. /Markus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
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 surrounding polygon (building or parcel). I've never come across disjunct areas with the same address, and another address in between. Even in that case, a multipolygon would suffice. No need for a dedicated address relation. * ... objects that have multiple addresses * ... a mixture of both. This is not easily achieved with other representations. addr tags on individual objects do not allow multiple addresses. They do, see my proposal. Overlapping polygons may work until you start thinking about features on different levels, but are pretty awkward as they require multiple overlapping polygons IMO it's just the other way around. Overlapping polygons are only needed if there are different levels (addr:floor) involved. In that case, you may draw a polygon for each level, set layer=* and addr:floor=*. I don't see why this shouldn't be working. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at 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 each POI instead, resulting in 5x the same number. That makes addresses on nodes problematic for Mapnik too. One principle I like in OSM is one feature, one OSM element: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element A single address should be tagged only once. If you have several POI's with the same address, tag the address on its own node. The node does not have to be be floating but can be attached on the building way, either on the building entrance or where post boxes are physically (or vitually). Then it is to the software consumers to find the nearest node address when they search information about a specific POI. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
2012/12/4 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at 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 each POI instead, resulting in 5x the same number. That makes addresses on nodes problematic for Mapnik too. One principle I like in OSM is one feature, one OSM element: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element A single address should be tagged only once. If you have several POI's with the same address, tag the address on its own node. The node does not have to be be floating but can be attached on the building way, either on the building entrance or where post boxes are physically (or vitually). Then it is to the software consumers to find the nearest node address when they search information about a specific POI. I agree with you. If a building has more than one address I usually put it on the relevant entrance. If there is no relevant entrance I put it on a node on the building way, where the plate is. Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
Pieren pier...@gmail.com 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 address somewhere in no man's land. It always refers to some property. A single address should be tagged only once. If you have several POI's with the same address, tag the address on its own node. This is not how mappers usually handle this case. They set the address on each POI, because otherwise applications cannot find out which POI has which address. The node does not have to be be floating but can be attached on the building way, either on the building entrance or where post boxes are physically (or vitually). There are many possibilities where to put the node, but each of them has some cases where it won't work, and there are always arguments and edit wars about this. This is because each of the position is only part of the truth. The whole truth is that an address is actually an attribute of a 2- oder 3-dimensional object. Then it is to the software consumers to find the nearest node address when they search information about a specific POI. The nearest node may not be the right one. E.g. the nearest node may be the address node of the next house. Or it may even be a node on the other side of the street! And not to mention that this won't do it for multiple addresses. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann Davidgasse 76-80/40/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
Am 04/dic/2012 um 11:16 schrieb Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at 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 each POI instead, resulting in 5x the same number. That makes addresses on nodes problematic for Mapnik too. One principle I like in OSM is one feature, one OSM element: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element A single address should be tagged only once. If you have several POI's with the same address, tag the address on its own node. 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, why not tag the entrance with entrance and put the address on the whole building outline (or even on the whole site it applies to if you have this information)? If there are multiple addresses for the same area one can simply create multiple address-objects. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
2012/12/4 Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at: Pieren pier...@gmail.com 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 address somewhere in no man's land. It always refers to some property. generally agree with you, but you might also see it as a feature (in which case a node is a poor representation) A single address should be tagged only once. If you have several POI's with the same address, tag the address on its own node. This is not how mappers usually handle this case. They set the address on each POI, because otherwise applications cannot find out which POI has which address. applications could find out which POIs are inside which address-polygon, but it requires some processing, it is not impossible, but it might take too long if you want up to date data (incremental updates) depending on your calculation capacities. There are many possibilities where to put the node, but each of them has some cases where it won't work, and there are always arguments and edit wars about this. This is because each of the position is only part of the truth. The whole truth is that an address is actually an attribute of a 2- oder 3-dimensional object. +1 cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
2012/12/4 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 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, why not tag the entrance with entrance and put the address on the whole building outline (or even on the whole site it applies to if you have this information)? We are running in circles here. Putting it on the building outline or the site outline/relation seems right, but doesn't work for multiple addresses on the same building/site. If there are multiple addresses for the same area one can simply create multiple address-objects. You just said above that addresses are not features, but attributes. So what is an 'address object' and how can I create multiple of them? If you mean to create multiple building outlines to tag an address on each, we are clearly in the realm of 'one feature, one OSM element'. May I also add that, at least in theory, we are talking about a spacial database which should have no problem in determine which element lies within which other element. So an amenity node inside a building has an implicit relation to that building and could 'inherit' its address. So there is, again: in theory, no need for repeating the address on each POI. In the real world, we should of course just add that little but of redundancy because most data consumers and even our database are not that 'spacial aware'. I tried to find out what an address really points to here in Germany. I wasn't successful. You get a house number for a parcel of land, even without a house on it, but only if it is already connected to a street. When you build a house you definitely get one. Or the house inherits the number from the parcel. But you can get more than one number if you build multiple houses. (Or you can build additional houses without a number.) You can also get more numbers if you have multiple entrances to a building. But it is no problem for several flats in the same building to share the same number too. I couldn't find out on who's discretion this happens. And then there is the postal service, which some times even defines its own scheme when it for instance give a whole postal code range to a company, sets the address of a building to some street/city it isn't located at/in or delivers to mailboxes that are not in the same street then the buildings they belong to. my 2 cents, Chaos ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
On 4 December 2012 12:22, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote: Am 04/dic/2012 um 11:16 schrieb Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at 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 each POI instead, resulting in 5x the same number. That makes addresses on nodes problematic for Mapnik too. One principle I like in OSM is one feature, one OSM element: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element A single address should be tagged only once. If you have several POI's with the same address, tag the address on its own node. 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, why not tag the entrance with entrance and put the address on the whole building outline (or even on the whole site it applies to if you have this information)? If there are multiple addresses for the same area one can simply create multiple address-objects. This seems just weird. 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. The second problem would be that there would be multiple instances of the same address. If there really is a need to bind address and POI together then create a relation for that. /Markus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
2012/12/4 Ronnie Soak chaoschaos0...@googlemail.com: 2012/12/4 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 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, why not tag the entrance with entrance and put the address on the whole building outline (or even on the whole site it applies to if you have this information)? We are running in circles here. Putting it on the building outline or the site outline/relation seems right, but doesn't work for multiple addresses on the same building/site. it does (if like in the examples given above the same appartment has multiple addresses you will add several addresses for the same polygon (e.g. by using multipolygons or overlapping ways)), and in the other case (multiple addresses inside the same building, but every spot has only one address) you won't attach the address to the whole building outline, but to the part it applies to. You just said above that addresses are not features, but attributes. So what is an 'address object' and how can I create multiple of them? no, I said you can see it either as attribute or as feature. If you mean to create multiple building outlines to tag an address on each, we are clearly in the realm of 'one feature, one OSM element'. delete the word building and we are there ;-), several polygons. So an amenity node inside a building has an implicit relation to that building and could 'inherit' its address. So there is, again: in theory, no need for repeating the address on each POI. ...as long as you don't map the address on a node, yes. In the real world, we should of course just add that little but of redundancy because most data consumers and even our database are not that 'spacial aware'. +1, spatial calculations on the fly are often too expensive, so preprocessing would be needed I tried to find out what an address really points to here in Germany. I wasn't successful. You get a house number for a parcel of land, even without a house on it, but only if it is already connected to a street. wrong question (in Germany) because this is not regulated on a national level. Anyway, from the building law it seems clear that the site must be connected to a street because otherwise you won't be able to build something there. When you build a house you definitely get one. Or the house inherits the number from the parcel. But you can get more than one number if you build multiple houses. (Or you can build additional houses without a number.) You can also get more numbers if you have multiple entrances to a building. But it is no problem for several flats in the same building to share the same number too. I couldn't find out on who's discretion this happens. on the discretion of you local authorities (you will get the numbers necessary...). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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 rendering rules. The second problem would be that there would be multiple instances of the same address. why is this a problem? The address would be the sum of all these occurencies. 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 need for relations here. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
On 4 December 2012 13:23, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote: 2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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 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? The second problem would be that there would be multiple instances of the same address. why is this a problem? The address would be the sum of all these occurencies. If you want to calculate a route to or from an address it is preferable that there's just one instance. 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 need for relations here. I'm not saying it has to be done at all instances, just if you really adding some information to the map. Also you need a relation to tell what kind of relationship there is between the address and the POI. E.g. a restaurant might have one address at which it receives customers, an other where it accepts deliveries and a third for staff entrance and a forth to receive snail mail. /Markus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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? why should the address be an icon? The second problem would be that there would be multiple instances of the same address. why is this a problem? The address would be the sum of all these occurencies. If you want to calculate a route to or from an address it is preferable that there's just one instance. you could calculate the centre of all equal address-points, or just take the first, it wouldn't make any practical difference. Anyway: it is preferable not to use this approach, I agree that tagging a polygon is the better way if you know the extension of an address. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
On 4 December 2012 17:44, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote: 2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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? why should the address be an icon? I include numerical digits in the concept of an icon. So to reiterate, your scheme makes it impossible to render addresses and POIs at the same time. The second problem would be that there would be multiple instances of the same address. why is this a problem? The address would be the sum of all these occurencies. If you want to calculate a route to or from an address it is preferable that there's just one instance. you could calculate the centre of all equal address-points, or just take the first, it wouldn't make any practical difference. If in the real world there's one 10 Main Street, then in the OSM database there also should be just one instance, IMHO. /Markus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
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 markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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 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 * ... objects that have multiple addresses * ... a mixture of both. This is not easily achieved with other representations. addr tags on individual objects do not allow multiple addresses. Overlapping polygons may work until you start thinking about features on different levels, but are pretty awkward as they require multiple overlapping polygons - or a multipolygon relation for each address, but then you are still using relations, you've just changed the type. I'm not sure which solution I personally prefer yet, but I wouldn't dismiss relations entirely. Tobias ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
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 dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm markus.lindh...@gmail.com mailto:markus.lindh...@gmail.com: 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? why should the address be an icon? I include numerical digits in the concept of an icon. So to reiterate, your scheme makes it impossible to render addresses and POIs at the same time. Why? Yes, there are two conflicting information packets on the same spot, one is the address and one is the POI that could be rendered e.g. as a shop. But it's up to the rendering rules how to deal with that. Using a distinct address node currently leads to arbitrary random decisions which element to draw on the map due to space collision detection. Having both in one icon could (but is not currently) be used to define rules about how to draw a shop that has an address - e.g. by slightly moving the house number to the bottom of the icon, or by rendering the housenumber on top of the icon willingly (might depend on the icon). 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. regards Peter ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
On 5 December 2012 05:56, Peter Wendorff wendo...@uni-paderborn.de 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 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. 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. /Markus ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
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 primary address, and all staircases of said building are referenced just with a letter after any of the possible street addresses. The numbers can be on a separate lamp on each wall, away from any entrances. Which means that the house numbers really have to go as separate nodes inside the building This is covered by my proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Multiple_addresses No need for floating address nodes. and each entrance only has the ref=letter on them. The approved tag for staircase letters (or numbers) is addr:unit=*, although addr:staircase=* would seem more reasonable to me. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
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 Laurilauri.kyto...@aalto.fi: 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 addresses. The numbers can be on a separate lamp on each wall, away from any entrances. Which means that the house numbers really have to go as separate nodes inside the building, and each entrance only has the ref=letter on them. OK for multiple addresses and housenumbers for the same building, you have this almost everywhere, but do you have cases where the same appartment has multiple addresses? These are abundant. I know because I worked as a postman for some months. Many people get mail addressed with either address. I live in a block with 5 addresses, one for each adjacent street (with a house number plate for each) and one with a street not adjacent to the block (no plate, but this is the primary postal address). As a general note I'd regard addresses on nodes preliminary, usually it is a polygon that has an address. Whether or not the mapper can get the information which is the polygon for a certain address is a different issue (and here nodes are serving us sufficently well for the moment). There are plenty of problems with those nodes even now. E.g. there is no connection between separate address nodes and real objects, so you cannot search for a doctor at address X. Adress nodes also cause a lot of headache when buildings are realigned to better arial images. The address nodes should be realigned as well, but usually they aren't. 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 each POI instead, resulting in 5x the same number. That makes addresses on nodes problematic for Mapnik too. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
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 building are referenced just with a letter after any of the possible street addresses. The numbers can be on a separate lamp on each wall, away from any entrances. Which means that the house numbers really have to go as separate nodes inside the building, and each entrance only has the ref=letter on them. Consumers need to support separate address nodes inside the building anyway, for that has been used extensively, so that should not break anything, either. -- Alv ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants
2012/12/2 Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi: 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 addresses. The numbers can be on a separate lamp on each wall, away from any entrances. Which means that the house numbers really have to go as separate nodes inside the building, and each entrance only has the ref=letter on them. OK for multiple addresses and housenumbers for the same building, you have this almost everywhere, but do you have cases where the same appartment has multiple addresses? As a general note I'd regard addresses on nodes preliminary, usually it is a polygon that has an address. Whether or not the mapper can get the information which is the polygon for a certain address is a different issue (and here nodes are serving us sufficently well for the moment). cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
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 lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi: 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 addresses. The numbers can be on a separate lamp on each wall, away from any entrances. Which means that the house numbers really have to go as separate nodes inside the building, and each entrance only has the ref=letter on them. OK for multiple addresses and housenumbers for the same building, you have this almost everywhere, but do you have cases where the same appartment has multiple addresses? That's exactly what he's saying. The addresses here are typically not for a part of the building but for the whole building, or actually for land area it's in (lot? parcel? or whatever would be proper English word for that land), so it could cover even more than one building. And then a totally separate address space for the apartments is combined to them to get the full address. Apartment address space typically follows letter+number scheme. That gives you 1ststreet numberX A 1 and 2ndstreet numberY A 1, etc. for the very same apartment! ...This is not an exception but very very common here (addresses are assigned for all streets a lot/parcel is touching so it happens in practice at every road intersection). Officially none of them is given priority but in many cases people tend to use one of them more than the others. However, I've seen cases where the addresses given to subscription systems were automatically reassign to another ones for the delivery (more than once, I suspect it could be some delivery route optimization feature). In addition to that, we of course have buildings with different addresses sharing a wall in packed areas which was probably what you meant with you have this almost everywhere? However, again those adjacent buildings could have here more than one address each. -- i.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
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, but each with it's own entry: addr: on the building outline, multiple entrance nodes on the outline, amenity tags on the entrance nodes. Several amenities per building with more than one amenity per door: addr:* on the building outline, several entrance nodes along the outline, amenity tags on extra nodes near the entrances inside the building outline. Several addresses per building: addr:* tags on entrance nodes along the building outline. Some also prefer to put amenities and building into a site relation. Pros: scales the solution with the complexity of the problem. Cons: not very consistent, renders poorly Regards, Chaos Am 30.11.2012 23:42 schrieb Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com: -- 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 adding entrance doors to several buildings. My Question: Where should amenity=* and addr:*=* be tagged? One suggestion was to add all the detail to the entrance node, but this seems odd to me. For single occupancy buildings I suggested tagging the building as amenity=*, etc as the entrance node on the building can be easily matched with these. But what about a building with multiple occupants and entrances. For example 2 shops in one building. One option is to tag the building with building=yes and then add the amenity tags to individual nodes, but then how would door to door routing work? An alternative is to just split the building in to 2 areas (but technically its 1 building). Can we use some form of indoor mapping (e.g. room=yes, amenity=*)? Is there a better solution? All ideas welcome. Regards, Rob ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[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 adding entrance doors to several buildings. My Question: Where should amenity=* and addr:*=* be tagged? One suggestion was to add all the detail to the entrance node, but this seems odd to me. For single occupancy buildings I suggested tagging the building as amenity=*, etc as the entrance node on the building can be easily matched with these. But what about a building with multiple occupants and entrances. For example 2 shops in one building. One option is to tag the building with building=yes and then add the amenity tags to individual nodes, but then how would door to door routing work? An alternative is to just split the building in to 2 areas (but technically its 1 building). Can we use some form of indoor mapping (e.g. room=yes, amenity=*)? Is there a better solution? All ideas welcome. Regards, Rob ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
