[Tagging] Relation:associatedStreet: house or address? factorizing?

André Pirard A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com
Thu Mar 13 15:15:00 UTC 2014

On 2014-03-13 15:17, Jo wrote :
> What do you mean by 'factorize'?
The same as Sylvain Letuffe and Albert Einstein ;-)
a is a multiple common factor that is expressed only once.
It is the street name that can be alongside each number or only once in
the relation.
Понимаешь? ;-)



> Jo
> 2014-03-13 15:00 GMT+01:00 André Pirard <A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com
> <mailto:A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com>>:
>     Hi,
>     How great to finally more than an empty page
>     <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:associatedStreet> !!!
>     But now, if that relation factorizes (2) "street name" shouldn't
>     it factorize addr: city, country, postcode too?
>     Shouldn't those keys be allowed in the relation?
>     Shouldn't those who know the deep secrets of that relation write
>     that down in this page instead of various messages I see?
>     But I have a little problem here
>     <http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/176885423>.
>     addr:housenumber is on a node.
>     If the relation contains
>       * Way Le Théâtre à Denis (176885423)
>         <http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/176885423> as house
>       * Node 1873693518 <http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1873693518>
>         as house
>     JOSM diagnoses
>     "Member for role house of wrong type" - Role verification problem
>        2 objects: Rue Sainte-Marguerite, Le Théâtre à Denis
>     Now if I remove the second member (1), JOSM diagnoses *2 problems*:
>     House number without street
>     "Member for role house of wrong type" - Role verification problem
>        2 objects: Rue Sainte-Marguerite, Le Théâtre à Denis
>     (1) the role is "house" but the descriptive comment very vaguely,
>     tersely and strangely describes it as "one or more house numbers"
>     which is logical.
>     Should I assume that "house" is a misnomer, that it means
>     "address" and that I need only the node?
>     (2) After having received the message below, quoting the worst
>     written article of all the wiki, always invoked without
>     justifications,  saying that "I have not understood" that
>     relations are not made to factorize tags of all members, I am
>     surprised to see associatedStreet factorize the "street" tag of
>     all of its "house" members.
>     Who did not understand?
>     A relation, whatever its type but probably not associatedStreet,
>     could as well factorize a speed limit or any zone.
>     Cheers,
>     André.
>     On 2012-11-22 01:34, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote :
>>     Hi,
>>     Le mercredi 21 novembre 2012 22:53:53, A.Pirard.Papou a écrit :
>>>     Look at multilinestring, which I see as a swiss-knife way assembly.
>>>     In my mind, such a relation is the way to assign the same tags to a
>>>     collection of objects making a whole with regard to those tags.  If we
>>>     add recursion (nesting), which is very easy to do, that's powerful.
>>     You misunderstood the idea/goal behind the multilinestring proposal. It wasn't 
>>     created to factorize tags of all members. It was used to record one real life 
>>     feature made of 2 or more OSM way objects. (like a long river, a boundary 
>>     between two countries all made of hundreds of ways) 
>>     A key sentence has been added to avoid using it badly : 
>>     "Do not use it to group loose ways : Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories  
>>     (like all path in a forest) Example : if the name is not the same for all 
>>     those ways, then you'd better not use this relation"
>>     What you are looking for is a category thing to group "loose ways" sharing a 
>>     common property but relation weren't made for that :
>>     http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Relations_are_not_Categories

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20140313/fa77bff0/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list