[josm-dev] Czech house numbers

[Radomir Cernoch]

"Marc Schütz" píše v Po 11. 05. 2009 v 14:49 +0200:
> > > Maybe the tag name could be more descriptive? I remember having read the
> > term "conscription number" for the system you described.
> > 
> > Hmm, I haven't known the word "conscription" before and
> > my dictionary translates it as "call up for military service".
> > This does not seem to me very intuitive... ;-)
> > Or is there another meaning, which my dictionary does not know?
> 
> Wikipedia only has a german article for that:
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konskriptionsnummer
> 
> The numbers have indeed been introduce to register the entire population
> for the purpose of conscripting people to military service. This
> registration was done indirectly by numbering the houses.
> 
> > 
> > What about words like 'secondarynumber', 'minornumber' or 'sidenumber'?
> > Especially the last one seems fine to me and moreover it's short...
> 
> I was simple looking for either a more descriptive or an official term.
> How is "číslo popisné" translated to english? Does it mean "description
> number"? Then maybe this should be used.
> 
> On the other hand, if alternatenumber is in use already, it can
> of course be kept.

Thank you for the article, it's interesting to read a few lines from
common history. It's also good to read that address systems in Germany,
Austria, Slovakia, Czech Republic (and probably Hungary as well) can
share the same data model.

Yes, "číslo popisné" is "descriptive number". Nevertheless I'm afraid of
sticking too much to terminology from central Europe if we want to make
it available for the world. I guess we should express that this number
is "not the main one" or "the other" or "the alternative number"...

Because of all this, keeping alternatenumber is the best option for us.
Czech Republic has a lot of address nodes tagged like this already.
If you don't have to change anything, nor people in other countries,
let's keep this schema.

> > > Another question is, which tag to use in cases where there is only one
> > housenumber. Should addr:housenumber always be filled in, even if there is
> > only a number belong to the alternate system?
> > 
> > Personally I think that this idea would lead to confusion at the moment
> > we want machines to read these numbers. You would not be able to
> > distinguish when 'alternatenumber' is missing in the map (but the house
> > has it) and when 'housenumber' is missing on the house (so the map has
> > correct information).
> 
> I was more thinking of the cases where the house itself (and probably
> each of the other houses in the same village too) has only one number.
> While this number would formally belong to one of the two systems,
> in practice it would not make much of a difference.

I'm sorry, but I am not quite sure, what would be the advantage of the
system you propose... apart from keeping renderers' style definitions.

For example in CZ, 'housenumber' and 'alternatenumber' are physically
two different plates on a house, each with a different colour. The user
should be noticed that the number in the village he's currently looking
at is not the number associated with the street. And then there's the
machine readability.

> > I would rather see mapnik/osmarender to draw 'alternatenumber' in case
> > 'housenumber' is not present (possibly with different style).
> > Do you think this is a good idea?
> 
> Yes.
> 
-- 
Radomir Cernoch
+44 750 708 8293
Email, Jabber: radomir.cernoch at gmail.com