On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Toby Murray <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have nothing to add to the CDP discussion but that is not your problem > here. I looked at this after my own address import. This is definitely a > Nominatim issue. What happens is that Nominatim associates address points > with roads. In order to reduce duplication, some information is associated > with roads instead of on the individual address points themselves. This > includes addr:city which is assigned to roads based on containment within > an administrative boundary, not based on any addr:city tags on address > nodes. > > You could fix this by adding an addr:city tag to the road that these > addresses belong to. This overrides any admin boundary containment. However > this seems like a case of "tagging for the geocoder" and I think Nominatim > needs to be changed to make this problem better. Like, if all addresses > being associated with a given road have the same addr:city tag on them then > it should carry that over to the road and override anything Nominatim comes > up with on its own. > > As an example I did add an addr:city tag to one road: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/13226787 > > Notice that if you search for an address along Cottonwood Circle with > Manhattan in the search (ex: 3700 Cottonwood Circle, Manhattan, KS) it > finds it. But if you search for an address on the neighboring road (ex: > 6001 Stony Brook Drive, Manhattan, KS) it finds nothing until you remove > the Manhattan at which point it finds the address but reports it to be > simply in Riley County. > I'll report a bug to Nominatim since I started this. Putting addr:city on a highway doesn't seem right. Especially if the road isn't in the city boundary although less tagging than adding a city tag to each address node. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
