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
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
