On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 07:05:10PM +0100, ipswichmapper--- via Tagging wrote: > Okay. In this case I can rename to proposal page to "addr:range". > > This new tag: > > - applies to nodes and closed ways that have addr:housenumber > - "addr:range=n" means every nth house is counted in a range > - "addr:range=even/odd" means every even/odd house is counted > - "addr:range=all" means every house is counted (default value for a > housenumber tag with a hyphen in it if no range is given). > - "addr:range=no" means that the housenumber tag is NOT a range of values but > rather a single housenumber.
It's better. It would resolve half the issue. addr:housenumber would still have a double interpretation but it's the smaller of the two issues. addr:housenumber:range would capture a bit better what the tag means but it starts to get uncomfortably long. > "addr:range=all" is the default because that is what the wiki says and what > software like streetcomplete suggests. Many buildings with multiple > housenumbers are tagged like this. That would only make sense, when you define addr:range as being applicable to housenumbers with hyphens only. However your definition above was imo more sensible: "applies to nodes and closed ways that have addr:housenumber" If you look at all nodes and ways with addr:housenumbers 99.999% have a addr:range=no. So that makes more sense as a default then. > However, software can create different defaults for different countries. For > example, in the UK a hypenated address most probably means a range of > even/odd addresses (so "addr:range=2") > > What are your thoughts on this? > Also, I had linked the talk-gb thread, which discusses how addr:interpolation > on closed ways and nodes is already standard. That is the problem with > suggesting a new tag. This proposal would now require informing multiple > mappers to switch up the taggong scheme. My guess would be that the main reason that people started using the hyphen notation with addr:housenumber is that they wanted something human readable on the map. And addr:housenumber was already rendered. With that in mind, I think there is a reasonable way forward even for a addr:range tag as you suggest and also for a separate addr:housenumber_range=1-15 like I would prefer. For both it is relatively easy to support a new agreed on proposal while still using the old behaviour where the new one is not yet implemented. So the transition would be: 1. Agree on proposal. 2. Get openstreetmap-carto, Nominatim and others to support new proposal. 3. Tell mappers about proposal. 4. Wait a few years. 5. Drop support for addr:housenumbers with interpolations. Sarah > > Thanks, > IpswichMapper > -- > > > 21 Dec 2020, 15:19 by lon...@denofr.de: > > > On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 02:37:08PM +0100, ipswichmapper--- via Tagging > > wrote: > > > >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/addr:interpolation_on_closed_ways_and_nodes > >> > >> Quick proposal I just created to accept this form of tagging. This follows > >> from a discussion on the Talk-GB mailing list. > >> > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-December/025553.html > >> > >> > >> Please comment if there are issues with accepting this form of tagging. > >> > > > > I dislike this kind of tagging to the point that I've refused to > > support it in Nominatim in the past. See > > https://github.com/osm-search/Nominatim/issues/565 for the full disucssion. > > > > The problem is that it makes the interpretation of addr:housenumber and > > addr:interpolation dependent on the presence of another tag. > > > > Note that addr:housenumber=40-48 can be a valid housenumber. Example: > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/285077586 So to know if the tag needs > > to be interpreted as a single housenumber or as a housenumber range > > you need to check if the node/way has a addr:interpolation tag in addtion > > to the addr:housenumber tag. > > > > Similarly, a way with addr:interpolation needs to be processed in two > > different ways: If a addr:housenumber is present, then assume it's a > > building and parse the addr:housenumber tag to get the range. If no > > housenumber is on the way, assume it is a good old interpolation line > > and look at the housenumbers along the nodes of the way. > > > > I find this kind of double meaning for tagging confusing and error-prone. > > But I might be fighting wind mills here. > > > > Sarah > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tagging mailing list > > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
