<div dir="ltr"><div>The goal of the import was not to create an immutable authoritative representation of Vicmap addresses inside OSM but rather to do the heavy lifting to add most missing addresses to be then further refined as part of OSM. If addresses that were imported aren't right, delete them, if they should be in a different location, move them, if they shouldn't be a node but should be a way, update them, if they should instead be on another feature, move the tags across.</div><div><br></div><div>Even with the import I still don't see OSM as being a dataset that contains every single address that could exist or does in theory exist, but rather a representation of what's on the ground.</div><div><br></div><div>In terms of the specifics you can merge a new or existing business or other feature with the address node if you like, but I wouldn't make this a blanket rule, things should still be looked at case by case.</div><div><br></div><div>The Vicmap data includes a "Display Address" field <a href="https://gitlab.com/alantgeo/vicmap2osm/#display-address">https://gitlab.com/alantgeo/vicmap2osm/#display-address</a> where the address is 75-77 but only displayed as 75. The import ignored this, but I think it's fine to change the address imported based on the display address based on OSM being a representation of the ground truth.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 at 15:48, Bob Cameron <<a href="mailto:bob3bob3@skymesh.com.au">bob3bob3@skymesh.com.au</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div>
<p>What is the best approach here? Should the import data be left
alone when (say) adding a business node to the same address, or
merge them? My concern is actually more a business can use "one"
of a dual street number address. eg the import may be "75-77", but
the business is either known as or has a street facing sign/box
for (just) 75.<br>
<br>
Thanks to those that did this BTW. Made my cross check of physical
imagery buildings (overhead and my own street images) a lot
easier. Had to rely on comparing tree plantings and street
furniture/markings solely before!</p>
<p>Cheers Bob<br>
</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-au mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>