[Tagging] Double and misfitting house numbers

Tobias cra_klinrain at gmx.de
Thu Jul 18 17:05:17 UTC 2013


On 18.07.2013 16:53, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Tobias <cra_klinrain at gmx.de> wrote:
> 
>> 1. Double house numbers: I want to tag the house number 101 of a shop.
>> The building in which the romms of the shop are located has the house
>> numbers 97,99,101,103,105,107,109. The house numbers of the building are
>> either tagged on the entrances each or on the building-way (here:
>> addr:housenumber=97,99,101,103,105,107,109) since the association to the
>> entrances is unknown.
> 
>> Because there are several shops with the same house number, there would
>> be several nodes or ways with the same house number. And only one is
>> concerning the building/entrance.
> 
> There are things I'm not sure I understand here.
> 
> The example you show is a shopping mall, with the address tagged on
> the building as a set of housenumbers (as you say, 97, 99, 101...)
> 
> But  then you say all the stores share the same housenumber.

Just a few shops share the same house number.

There are actually more shops in the mall than there are shops at the
OSM. And there are also shops in the level above.

> 
> I'm not sure I understand that, so maybe you an clarify it for me.
> 
> Are you saying that all the stores are 97, 99, 101, 103, etc. or that
> one store, say the Garde bakery, is at 99, and the Schäfer's Backshop
> (you people sure do love your bakeries!) is at 103?

The second is right in this example.

In fact every shop has an house number, but it is often not labeled at
the shop's door. The postal service would also know where to deliver
something, if you write for every shop inside the mall 97-103 instead of
the exact house number.

> 
> If the stores have a housenumber- and you know that housenumber,
> include it in the store.
> 
> If they're shared amongst all the stores equally, ie they all have 97,
> 99, 101, etc. then I'd tag the building.

It is kind of both. So in the end you will have the 101 on the building
and the shop.

> 
> 
>> For those who would like to have an example from the real world - here
>> it is:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.101067&lon=8.787526&zoom=18&layers=M
> 
> Very useful to have an example...
> 
>> Another thing is that renderers are double-rendering those house numbers
>> (which is better than the opposite) and since some rooms are added to a
>> building (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr), house numbers
>> are there not only twice.
> 
> If each shop had one housenumber, then I'd remove it from the building
> as I added it onto the shop.

Since this is not redundant, I will agree. I think you could obtain the
address of an amenity within the building-way from the building way
attributes.

> 
>> The shop has the
>> address 14-16 which means that none of the building addresses is fitting
>> the shop address. Hence I would have to add addr:housenumber=14-16 which
>> is like above in a way a double housenumber-tagging.
> 
> It's okay if both objects have the address tag, because both are correct.

Since this is the common way - it would solve both problems in a way.
But just since you do not remove the house numbers from the building way
or the entrances, otherwise flats which are not tagged are identified in
the google way (as you are writing below).

> 
> The building I live in is mixed use. Some of the building contains
> retail shops, and then there's a large apartment complex (which is
> where I live).

So there are two separate buildings?

> 
> I've tagged the shops with the same addr:housenumber as the apartment
> complex, because that's the truth.

So you are preferring to double-tag each house number. In your example I
would say that you do not need to add house numbers to the shops because
they can be obtained from the building way.

> 
> Google is confused about this and thinks I live in a store, but
> Nominatim simply asks if I mean the apartment complex, or the
> shops.[1]

Does Google use OSM Data at you place? At my place I guess google bought
the right to use those data from the local municipal authority or
somebody else.

> 
> - Serge
> 
> [1] I'm anthropomorphizing a bit here. What really happens is that
> Google returns a single value for the address, while Nomatim returns
> multiple values.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 

Thank you for your opinion and helpful advices so far!


I am summing up a little bit (correct me, if I am going too far or am
wrong):
* Since you know the house number of a shop include it in the node/way
of the shop.
* In general it is allowed to have a house number twice or multiple
times - since it is correct in the real world.
* Two distinct buildings which share a house number are both tagged with
the house number (necessarily true).
* Since every shop/amenity of a building has a house number it can be
removed from the entrance node or building way.

Since all of that is common sense, I do not feel good about removing
house numbers from the building ways or entrance nodes.

May be some people do not agree in the first point, because they believe
that there will be an algorithm which obtains house numbers from the
building or entrance. Is this just trolling for their own tagging scheme
or does/will Nominatim support this (soon)?

But to keep the house number on the shop and remove it from the building
way would be kind of the same idea. Just the other way round.



More information about the Tagging mailing list