[Imports] Belgium address import
ian.dees at gmail.com
Sun Nov 24 19:12:10 UTC 2013
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> On 24.11.2013 19:26, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> >> What's the benefit of tying the address to the structure? I've seen this
> >> spoken about quite a bit.
> > 3. Almost always, the points are either wrong or meaningless
> I'd like to second that.
> If there is a compelling reason to not tie the address to an existing
> structure, then so be it - e.g. keep an address node as
> building=entrance or something.
> If, however, the main reason for not wanting to make the link is "trying
> to make the link will show how bad the data really is, and just dumping
> address points into the database is good enough for geocoding anyway so
> why bother", then this is a clear argument for not importing the data at
> all, and keeping in a separate database instead - one that might, like
> TIGER address data, be loaded into the database user-side instead of
Completely aside from the import process, I've found that address points
make it *much* easier to improve the map, at least in the dense urban
American areas I've lived in recently (Chicago and Minneapolis).
Having address points in the dataset means I can open up iD on my computer
or Vespucci on my phone, move the node to the correct spot and add POI
information quickly and easily without worrying about screwing up the
building's shape (if it was an entrance node) or mis-tagging a building (if
it was a commercial building that has multiple businesses).
Yes, in a perfect world I would move the entrance node while ensuring the
building is squared or put the POI information on a new entrance node for
the multiple-business commercial building, but my wife is waiting in the
passenger seat and rolling her eyes while I do this, so time and easiness
is of the essence. :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Imports