<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Mar 16, 2022, 18:39 by f@zz.de:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div><br></div><div>Hi,<br></div><div><br></div><div>On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 05:05:58AM +0100, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:<br></div><blockquote><div>Handling addresses assigned to empty field/forests/wetlands is an ongoing <br></div><div>question among mappers in Poland and not entirely solved (in general importing<br></div><div>ones that will be likely in use in say 10 years is considered OK, but importing some<br></div><div>wild plans like addresses assigned to protected wetland is considered as a bad idea).<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>How do you actually determine whether addresses are being used? For<br></div><div>Germany i have seen Addresses being assigned to Cell Towers, underground<br></div><div>sewage pumps, public toilets, power substations etc. So its sometimes<br></div><div>not obvious where an address belongs to and WHO is actually using it and for WHAT. <br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">It depends on location (that is why I mentioned that I do not recommend <br></div><div dir="auto">verifying and importing addresses in Poland if you are unfamiliar with addressing<br></div><div dir="auto">in Poland).<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>I see the addresses in OSM as an superset of addresses available,<br></div><div>published and used.<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">Do you mean that unused and bogus officially assigned addresses<br></div><div dir="auto">should be imported?<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Examples include for example addresses<br></div><div dir="auto">assigned to plots that were bought by government and motorway<br></div><div dir="auto">was constructed there, many of them were never used.<br></div><div dir="auto">Which were not cancelled so far.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Or single address being represented as 6 separate addresses (with<br></div><div dir="auto">the same housenumber, all located with 10m from each other).<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Or other issues with official data like<br></div><div dir="auto">addr:housenumber=Niebieska<br></div><div dir="auto">add:streetname=12<br></div><div dir="auto">(formatted in OSM format for clarity)<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Or broken enconding. Or...<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Some local governments fix such such bogus entries on report.<br></div><div dir="auto">So far thousands were reported and large majority was fixed in the<br></div><div dir="auto">official database after OSM mappers reported them to authorities.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div>So what defines "is being used" and what is the problem with putting<br></div><div>ALL the used addresses into OSM?<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">I have no problem with putting addresses being used (or even likely to be used soon)<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But in some cases it is a subset of the official database.<br></div> </body>
</html>