[Imports] Belgium address import

[Randal Hale]

I ask because I will (hopefully) be faced with a comparable problem in 
2014 - I will have address data with no structure and it's going to be 
up to me/the client/or volunteers to add the buildings (if they want them).

I didn't know there were tools in josm for automatically handling 
address/building relations.

Randy

-----------------
Randal Hale, GISP
North River Geographic Systems, Inc
http://www.northrivergeographic.com
423.653.3611 rjhale at northrivergeographic.com
<mailto:rjhale at northrivergeographic.com>
twitter:rjhale
http://about.me/rjhale

On 11/24/2013 11:42 AM, Jo wrote:
> There seems to be a misunderstanding. While it is true that the person 
> who is handling the 'import' receives points with address data. These 
> contributors have to draw buildings around those points based on 
> really good imagery we have available.
>
> So, calling it an import is probably a misnomer. What we're planning 
> to do is use that data as an extra source, a convenience. Then do a 
> bit of hard work either relating it to existing buildings in OSM or 
> drawing new buildings over the nodes. The tools in JOSM automatically 
> transfer the info from the 'imported' nodes to the building 
> structures, thereby deleting the node.
>
> Conflation is handled manually, This is not a problem, as we have 
> relatively few addresses to begin with (compared to how many there 
> are). Expansion of abbreviations will also be done by humans, which 
> will be a lot more reliable than trying to code it.
>
> Jo
>
>
> 2013/11/24 Randal Hale <rjhale at northrivergeographic.com 
> <mailto:rjhale at northrivergeographic.com>>
>
>     I worked this summer on an addressing project - all the addresses
>     were points. In OSM I've seen discussion on relating the address
>     to a structure or putting an address on a structure - I would
>     rather keep it as a point within the structure (and not relating
>     it to the building) - but that's just me. I believe you are just
>     keeping the address as a point and not relating it to a structure
>     (I've been trying to keep up with your import as a matter of
>     interest).
>
>     Good luck on getting this done by the way.
>
>     Randy
>
>
>     -----------------
>     Randal Hale, GISP
>     North River Geographic Systems, Inc
>     http://www.northrivergeographic.com
>     423.653.3611 <tel:423.653.3611> rjhale at northrivergeographic.com
>     <mailto:rjhale at northrivergeographic.com>
>     <mailto:rjhale at northrivergeographic.com
>     <mailto:rjhale at northrivergeographic.com>>
>     twitter:rjhale
>     http://about.me/rjhale
>
>     On 11/24/2013 11:26 AM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>
>         On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 11:10:48AM -0500, Randal Hale wrote:
>
>             What's the benefit of tying the address to the structure?
>             I've seen
>             this spoken about quite a bit.
>
>         I'm not sure I understand your question.  Why would you want to
>         have a node with the address information when you can do it on
>         the building?  A _house_ number is a number for a house, so it
>         seems obvious to me to add that number to the house.
>
>
>         Kurt
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Imports mailing list
>     Imports at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Imports at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20131124/10e5554b/attachment.html>