[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - addrN:*

[Dan S]

2015-01-15 11:53 GMT+00:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
>
> 2015-01-15 12:43 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić <janjko at gmail.com>:
>>
>> With addrN:*=* it's clear that the same place has two addresses. If there
>> are two nodes, it seems like there are two places (Two entrances, two
>> apartments, two rooms), each with it's own address. AddrN* is clearly
>> superior in this aspect.
>
> you could use polygons (e.g. 2 distinct multipolygons, one for each
> address), and add a note to inform your fellow mapping colleagues that the
> overlap is intended (note is not needed but nice).

I was thinking about this solution too. The addrN scheme is really
quite awkward so it'd be nice to recommend something like simply
having two nodes/multipolygons with exactly the same overlapping
geometry. However, this gets horrible too: if both of the addresses
refer to a pub, should both objects be amenity=pub? (No!) Should they
be grouped under a relation which holds amenity=pub other properties?
Maybe, but that's getting just as awkward as addrN... It looks like
there's a problem to be solved, and none of the solutions is pleasant.
Hence I abstain ;)

Best
Dan