On 8 Dec 2008, at 13:41, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > SteveC wrote: >> "nodes on a way but not a relation" schema needs to have >> addr:street=foo on the addressing way ? > > The original idea was to (by default) assume that the street name is > the "name" tag of the nearest highway (i.e. no addr:* required), and > that you can optionally set addr:street on the node to make it 100% > clear.
I don't mean the node, I mean when you have numbers on a way, it would seem to make sense to make the way have addr:street rather than all the nodes. Either way, I don't think magically figuring out what street some nodes or ways housenumbers belong to should be left to closeness, it doesn't off the top of my head strike me as something that's computationally trivial - lots of edge cases. I figure a relation is nice, and requiring addr:street is a good lesser option. not purring addr:street should be discouraged. > But meanwhile - mostly because it is so easy to do in JOSM - many > people simply tag the whole shebang (addr:country, addr:town, > addr:post_code, addr:street, addr:house_number) onto every house > node. It adds redundancy but that is not necessarily bad - gives the > OSM inspector a chance to find fishy corners, and makes everything > really simple for anybody dealing with the data. > >> addr:housename needs to be added, or addr:housenumber needs to be >> explicit that it can be a name, or made a more generic term to >> encompass both > > The JOSM presets already supply addr:housename even though (to my > surprise) the wiki page doesn't list it. ah cool Best Steve _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
