[Tagging] Are addresses ... objects vs attributes
A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com
Wed Jul 24 18:17:15 UTC 2013
On 2013-07-24 16:54, Ronnie Soak wrote :
> On 24 Jul 2013 16:44, "Janko Mihelić" <janjko at gmail.com
> <mailto:janjko at gmail.com>> wrote
> > I don't think we should be so inflexible with the "object vs
> attribute". It depends on the context.
> > If you are a data consumer, and are making a list of all addresses
> in a town, then the addr:housenumber + addr:street is your object, and
> building=yes is your attribute that says "there is a building at this
> address". If you are making a list of all buildings, then it's the
> other way around. If you are making a list of restaurants, then the
> amenity=restaurant is your object, with attributes building and address.
The "object vs attributes" distinction I speak of is not related to
processing the database.
OSM is made of colorless tags and you consider them as primary or
secondary as you see fit.
The point is to avoid being told "you can't say it's *for* leisure
because you said it's *a* water".
It is finding a characteristic that one can make exclusive and that
Bing exclusive translates in facts the rule that a key must be unique.
Having to exist is necessary so that the allowed associated attributes
can be enumerated.
I think that the best way to do that is to use the physical nature, or
A building, a water, a highway etc... are characteristics that are
The point is that a water can be used for leisure but that leisure
cannot be uses as water.
The point is that water can be used for leisure fishing and swimming or
Hence water= is OK for a description but leisure= is not.
swimming= is an attribute of the water and is compatible with fishing=.
If we want to speak of addresses again, their problem being used as
objects defined that way starts with countries or streets using no
addresses. No problem using them either way you describe.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging