On 8 Dec 2008, at 23:51, Jochen Topf wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 03:37:00PM -0800, SteveC wrote: >> 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. > > Are you talking about the addr:interpolation way?
yes... > We specifically > decided to not put any more information on the addr:interpolation-way, > because that would mean that every software had to look for the > addr:*-Tags in the interpolation way *and* on the nodes which makes > things a bit more complex. Um ok. So I don't see why the nodes have to have addr:street. I'm assuming that the way would have addr:street on it, and the nodes would have the numbers. I don't see that picking the closest ways to match it as a good solution. Best Steve _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
