On 15 January 2015 at 12:43, Janko Mihelić <[email protected]> wrote: > 2015-01-15 12:23 GMT+01:00 Andrew Shadura <[email protected]>: >> >> On 15 January 2015 at 03:02, johnw <[email protected]> wrote: >> > The proposal seems to be a good solution to this problem. >> >> This particular proposal seems to be a terrible solution to this >> problem. It requires changes to the software, and the tagging scheme >> is ugly as hell. At the same time, there's much simpler and better >> solution: placing address nodes inside the building polygon. This is >> already used, supported by any sort of software which can process >> regular OSM address tags, and it's not as ugly as addrN:. > > > With addrN:*=* it's clear that the same place has two addresses. If there > are two nodes, it seems like there are two places (Two entrances, two > apartments, two rooms), each with it's own address. AddrN* is clearly > superior in this aspect.
For an absolute majority of cases it should be enough with address nodes that resides inside a building polygon. If their really is a need to explicitly associate multiple addresses to a single building then use the provides_feature relation. http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Provides_feature /Markus _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
