[OSM-talk] Yet another street number scheme
siliconfiend at gmail.com
Tue Oct 14 23:53:05 BST 2008
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) <
ajrlists at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Karl Newman wrote:
> >Sent: 14 October 2008 4:59 PM
> >To: Frederik Ramm
> >Cc: talk at openstreetmap.org
> >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Yet another street number scheme
> >On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 5:41 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>
> > <snip>
> > As for the efficiency in storage, I suggest you take the long-term
> > I am 100% sure that at some point in the future, OSM will have at
> > one node for every house, more likely a building outline for every
> > house. Look at this if you don't believe me:
> > At this point it will be trivial (easy to edit, easy to handle, and
> > requiring little extra storage) to simply add a house number tag to
> > every one of these buildings. Any sort of complex relations for
> > with interpolation rules for house numbers will then simply be
> > unnecessary.
> >That's not really true, because there are devices (such as Garmin GPS
> >receivers) on which we would like to use OSM data, which need address
> >numbers in a compact format with interpolation rules. Trying to reverse-
> >engineer the scheme (odd, even, both, etc.) from single nodes that aren't
> >even part of the way is nigh-impossible, or at the least, wastefully
> >compute-intesive and error-prone.
> However, houses are not part of the road network, so the house number node
> should not be part of the highway, that would be tagging for the Garmin or
> whatever. The house numbers need to go on the houses (or the object
> representing them).
No, that would be tagging for actually being able to use the data. Without
the odd/even/both information, it's actually a loss of data.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk