[Tagging] Are addresses features or attributes?

Elliott Plack elliott.plack at gmail.com
Fri Jul 19 17:43:39 UTC 2013


I like the address as a feature approach because not all addressed 'things' exist, and 'things' can have many addresses. That's how we deal with addresses in my gov's GIS.

For example: a vacant lot often has an address, but there doesn't need to be a building there.


Also some shopping centers have multiple addresses for the same building, so we make address points for each entrance or centroid. 
—
Elliott Plack
Sent from Mailbox on iPhone 5
about.me/elliottp

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> <<Forking the discussion from "Double and misfitting house numbers">>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Not for me. I think the address is a "feature" by ifself, not an
>> attribute of other features (like 'name').
>>
> I want to know what do people think about addresses.
> 1. Are addresses features as Pieren suggests? Thus addresses should be
> mapped separately or at least tagged singularly on the primary object that
> represents the address.
> 2. Or are addresses attributes (like names) of POIs, buildings, and the
> like? In which case, it would be OK if many POIs are mapped with the same
> addr:housenumbers.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20130719/331bbad0/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list