I don't believe that the address should be on either the property or the
building.
Specific example are where you have a 1 million acre property and if you
map it out and put the address on the boundary way it will show up
outside the property because of the shape of the property. If you put
it on the building it shows up but gives no indication of where the
property access is and if you attempted to get there you'd just get lost.
I always put address on node preferably where the access to the property is.
examples of these properties are here:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=12/-16.1609/135.6528
Bauhinia Downs is one and the other is Lorella Springs on the other side
of the north south road here.
As far as landuse=residential goes I have mapped from different sources
but rather then mapping individual properties map the whole area of
residential/retail/industrial etc.
An example here:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-21.0723/149.2217
Cheers
Ross
On 04/01/16 01:42, Michael Gratton wrote:
So basically there's no consensus about whether property boundaries
should be included or not, but regardless they won't get rendered
anyway.
I experimented by adding some properties and their addresses for a
couple of streets in around Enmore, and Nominatum was able to find the
addresses as you'd expect, e.g. searching for "22 charles st, enmore"
returns <http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/389348302>. However also as
expected no boundary or even house number was rendered.
What a shame. It seems that in lieu of having any buildings marked
out, using property borders would have been a useful way to indicate
addresses - also seems more correct than using buildings, to my mind
anyway.
//Mike
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
