[Imports] NYC building + address import - to merge or not to merge?

[Johan C]

It' not a black and white discussion. Maybe an ideal solution would be to
have an address on a building and have the entrance to this building
tagged. And in the case of flats, have all appartments available as outline
with the right level so that tagging will be consistent on the outlines.

The decision to merge or not to merge was in the hands of the local
community, so the not NYC community should respect this decision.

I'm interested in the feedback to DOITT. Could you explain what this means
for the feedback to their database?

Cheers, Johan



Op woensdag 23 oktober 2013 schreef Serge Wroclawski (emacsen at gmail.com):
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Alex Barth <alex at mapbox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> case for sticking to that convention.
>>
>> Taginfo tells us that we have 15.3 millions addr:housenumber's on
>> nodes vs 9.7 millions on ways.
>
> As has already been brought up, this is a very tricky number to
> actually get, because to do so, you would have to say that you know
> for sure that these nodes:
>
> 1. Are contained within a known building polygon
> 2. Do not represent some other information, such a store information
>
> To elaborate on #2, I typically put full address information stores,
> and here in NYC, a building often contains more than one store, so you
> will find one building polygon with more than one node within that
> polygon containing address information- sometimes even the same
> address information.
>
>  - Serge
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imports mailing list
> 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/20131023/39adee79/attachment.html>