I like the address as a feature approach because not all addressed 'things'
exist, and 'things' can have many addresses. That's how we deal with addresses
in my gov's GIS.
For example: a vacant lot often has an address, but there doesn't need to be a
building there.
Also some shopping centers have multiple addresses for the same building, so we
make address points for each entrance or centroid.
—
Elliott Plack
Sent from Mailbox on iPhone 5
about.me/elliottp
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar <[email protected]>
wrote:
> <<Forking the discussion from "Double and misfitting house numbers">>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Pieren <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Not for me. I think the address is a "feature" by ifself, not an
>> attribute of other features (like 'name').
>>
> I want to know what do people think about addresses.
> 1. Are addresses features as Pieren suggests? Thus addresses should be
> mapped separately or at least tagged singularly on the primary object that
> represents the address.
> 2. Or are addresses attributes (like names) of POIs, buildings, and the
> like? In which case, it would be OK if many POIs are mapped with the same
> addr:housenumbers.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
