if one building have 2 entrance, it's useful to describe with entrance need to be used to reach this flats number. but having all flats number on the building or on one-only entrance, is like "to reach the inside of the building, reach the building". it's a bit like adding entrance=yes on the building to say that a building has an entrance somewhere, you don't add any real information.
so at this place, I would not have added any addr:flats which would have solved the problem of rendering :) I will only use it in the case of a building with more than one entrance, and so addr:flats on the entrance does not disturb the display of addr:housenumber for the whole building. Le 15.06.20 à 13:55, Lionel Giard a écrit : > The tagging is correct, it is just not supposed to be on area from the > wiki perspective. But indeed I don't see why it is incorrect when a > building is only containing this series of flats and only one entrance ? > And if that's incorrect why are they rendering addr:flats on area and > not node ?! ^^' > > Le lun. 15 juin 2020 à 13:32, joost schouppe <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit : > > Most of this data comes from the GRB import, I would guess. So it > comes from CRAB. We use the addr:flats to map the "subaddresses". > It seems a little weird to not be able to add the subaddresses on > the same object that has the main address. > The CRAB import tool mentioned this as an optional tag, that is not > so useful for OSM: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AGIV_CRAB_Import#Optional_tags.2C_provided_by_the_tool > I would concur that the quality of the data is not good enough to > import it. > Both examples come from endless_autumn, who did a rather > quick-and-dirty GRB import - a lot of which was reverted. > The GRB-import-validator Midgard made actually flags the flats tag > as "consider removing" as well. > That said, the wiki doesn't say much about the logic of > "subaddresses", maybe we shouldn't use the addr:flats tag -at all- > for subaddresses? > > > Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:22 schreef Sander Deryckere > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>: > > Hmm, > > it seems indeed that, according to the wiki, this should not be > placed on areas. > However, I expect that in all these cases, all flats are > accessible behind the same door. > So correcting the tag will have the same effect. > > Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:12 schreef Marc M. > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>: > > Hello, > > Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit : > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102 > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374 > this look like a mistake : > wiki : marking range of numbers of flats behind a door, > but the object isn't a door, it's a building > > maybe osm.carto should avoid to render tagging mistake and > target > only node and maybe only with entrance or door tag > > Regards, > Marc _______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
