Re: [Tagging] Combined use of addr:place and addr:street

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-07-14 14:59 GMT+02:00 Tobias Wrede :

> it's by definition we refuse to have both tags, as addr:place is defined
> for places without streetnames
>
>
> Well that's the question here, isn't it? Is it by definition or not?
>



that's what the wiki says: "Use addr:place instead of addr:street
=* for such buildings,
whose number belong not to a street, but to some other object." and in more
words: "Sometimes, addresses don't contain the name of any street. Some
addresses are made with the scheme ", ". It can be the name of a village, islands, territorial zone or any
other object (sometimes, there is no existing object with that name). If we
use this tag instead of addr:street
=*) for such
addresses, it will be better for understanding and for software."


Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Combined use of addr:place and addr:street

[Tobias Wrede]

Am 14.07.2017 um 14:32 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:


2017-07-14 10:16 GMT+02:00 Tobias Wrede >:



Have a look at this place "Siesel":
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.22209/7.90369
. The
hamlet is called Siesel and officially all the streets there do
not have a name (you can check on the "NRW-Atlas: ALKIS" layer 
that all streets are just designated "Weg" i. e. "Street"). From

an official address point of view all houses there should have
addr:place=Siesel and addr:housenumber=nn.



is "nn" meant to be literally the string "nn"? (btw: NN in German 
usage is a placeholder referring to people). In Italy, quite 
frequently in the countryside, there is the abbreviation "snc" to say 
"no housenumber", but I wouldn't add this in addr:housenumber as it's 
not a housenumber (you can find it in official lists in the 
housenumber field though).


Na. "nn" is meant to be a placeholder for the actual number: 12, 13, 14 
etc.


On the ground, tough, they have put up the usual German street
name signs all showing "Siesel". So from an on the ground point of
view all houses there should have addr:street=Siesel and
addr:housenumber=nn. What to do now?




 it's by definition we refuse to have both tags, as addr:place is 
defined for places without streetnames



Well that's the question here, isn't it? Is it by definition or not?

Tobi
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Combined use of addr:place and addr:street

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-07-14 10:16 GMT+02:00 Tobias Wrede :
> 
> Have a look at this place "Siesel": 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.22209/7.90369. The hamlet is called 
> Siesel and officially all the streets there do not have a name (you can check 
> on the "NRW-Atlas: ALKIS" layer  that all streets are just designated "Weg" 
> i. e. "Street"). From an official address point of view all houses there 
> should have addr:place=Siesel and addr:housenumber=nn.


is "nn" meant to be literally the string "nn"? (btw: NN in German usage is a 
placeholder referring to people). In Italy, quite frequently in the 
countryside, there is the abbreviation "snc" to say "no housenumber", but I 
wouldn't add this in addr:housenumber as it's not a housenumber (you can find 
it in official lists in the housenumber field though).

 
> On the ground, tough, they have put up the usual German street name signs all 
> showing "Siesel". So from an on the ground point of view all houses there 
> should have addr:street=Siesel and addr:housenumber=nn. What to do now?


IMHO the street name signs could result in highway names in OSM (highway=*, 
name=Siesel) as one alternative, or not (if you interpret them as the place 
name and not as a street name, because as a German native, I'd not expect 
"Siesel" to represent a streetname but rather a placename). In both cases, I 
wouldn't add addr:street tags with the "Siesel" as value, because it isn't the 
street name address.


 it's by definition we refuse to have both tags, as addr:place is defined for 
places without streetnames

cheers,
Martin 
 
> 
> I agree this is borderline but I don't see why we should categorically refuse 
> to have both tags.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Combined use of addr:place and addr:street

[Tobias Wrede]

For what it's worth answering a bit late. I am not sure I completely agree.

2017-06-23 10:18 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer >:





   I agree with you, either use
   addr:place

   or use
   addr:street

   As the reason for using addr:place is that there isn't a street to
   which the address refers, I also don't see which street should go
   into addr:street, it makes no sense.


Have a look at this place "Siesel": 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.22209/7.90369. The hamlet is 
called Siesel and officially all the streets there do not have a name 
(you can check on the "NRW-Atlas: ALKIS" layer  that all streets are 
just designated "Weg" i. e. "Street"). From an official address point of 
view all houses there should have addr:place=Siesel and 
addr:housenumber=nn. On the ground, tough, they have put up the usual 
German street name signs all showing "Siesel". So from an on the ground 
point of view all houses there should have addr:street=Siesel and 
addr:housenumber=nn. What to do now? I would say that in this case we 
could perfectly well have both addr:place and addr:street.


I agree this is borderline but I don't see why we should categorically 
refuse to have both tags.


Note that I just searched my mind for a case where this could happen. 
The actual tagging here is just using the addr:street.


Tobi
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Combined use of addr:place and addr:street

[Javier Sánchez Portero]

I edited the wiki and tried to improve the text a bit. As English is not my
native langauge any additional correction will be appreciated.

Best regards.

2017-06-23 10:18 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

>
> 2017-06-23 10:01 GMT+02:00 Javier Sánchez Portero :
>
>> Regarding to the use of addr:place together with addr:street, I see a
>> discrepancy between [1] which says: "Should not be used together with
>> addr:street=*"
>>
>> And [2], which says: "Use addr:place additional to addr:street=* for such
>> building, whose numbers belong not to street, but to some other object. It
>> is proposed to delete addr:street=* from such houses in the future"
>>
>> I will like to correct this with a unified criterion in both places.
>> Which one is the prefered criterion for you? I think that the addr:place
>> tag should be used when there isn't a street with name to assign to the
>> address so I don't see corret to use addr:street together with addr:place.
>> What is your opinion?
>>
>
>
> I agree with you, either use
> addr:place
>
> or use
> addr:street
>
> As the reason for using addr:place is that there isn't a street to which
> the address refers, I also don't see which street should go into
> addr:street, it makes no sense.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Combined use of addr:place and addr:street

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-06-23 10:01 GMT+02:00 Javier Sánchez Portero :

> Regarding to the use of addr:place together with addr:street, I see a
> discrepancy between [1] which says: "Should not be used together with
> addr:street=*"
>
> And [2], which says: "Use addr:place additional to addr:street=* for such
> building, whose numbers belong not to street, but to some other object. It
> is proposed to delete addr:street=* from such houses in the future"
>
> I will like to correct this with a unified criterion in both places. Which
> one is the prefered criterion for you? I think that the addr:place tag
> should be used when there isn't a street with name to assign to the address
> so I don't see corret to use addr:street together with addr:place. What is
> your opinion?
>


I agree with you, either use
addr:place

or use
addr:street

As the reason for using addr:place is that there isn't a street to which
the address refers, I also don't see which street should go into
addr:street, it makes no sense.


Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Combined use of addr:place and addr:street

[Javier Sánchez Portero]

Hello

Regarding to the use of addr:place together with addr:street, I see a
discrepancy between [1] which says: "Should not be used together with
addr:street=*"

And [2], which says: "Use addr:place additional to addr:street=* for such
building, whose numbers belong not to street, but to some other object. It
is proposed to delete addr:street=* from such houses in the future"

I will like to correct this with a unified criterion in both places. Which
one is the prefered criterion for you? I think that the addr:place tag
should be used when there isn't a street with name to assign to the address
so I don't see corret to use addr:street together with addr:place. What is
your opinion?

Regards, Javier Sanchez

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:place
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging