[Tagging] address property vs. housenumber as a feature

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Fri May 11 09:53:50 UTC 2018

2018-05-11 10:40 GMT+02:00 Javier Sánchez Portero <javiersanp at gmail.com>:

> In Spain, there isn't a relation one-to-one between entrances and
> addresses, but it's pretty common to have a building with more than one
> address. They may be a building with access from different streets or a
> building (maybe with a housename) and some consecutive numbers (even or
> odd) in the same street. For this reason many people (me included) are
> mapping addresses as nodes pinpointing the house number plaques found at
> street level. Most of the time they are associated to an entrance, but not
> always. We put a node in the building footprint (if it's only one) or in
> the parcel limit when many buildings share the address and there are a
> visible barrier as delimiter. I think that this method reflect best the
> reality, gather more information and is best for micromapping.
> I don't like the duplication of information, prone to be inconsistent
> between the address in the entrance and in the multiple POI's that could be
> inside the building or area.

IMHO these inconsistencies often are useful to see that the POI (or the
housenumber) is not positioned well. If you don't add address information
to a POI and don't have an area with address information where it is
included, you don't have this information.

> May be it would be good to have a relation to keep in only one place an
> address and link there the affected elements: entrances, buildings, POI's
> and area for this address. This would be necessary only for some cases like
> a building with many addresses/POI's. The simplest use cases would be done
> as usual. Looking the history of the associated_street and street relation
> may be this idea is too controversial so opinions are appreciated.

We could add relations to model which addresses belong to which POI (and
this would also work for multiple addresses for one POI), but it really
isn't the same as stating the address the POI is _using_, because it might
"have" several entrances (and windows) with addresses but use only part of
them (i.e. we would need roles to say which addresses lead to the POI, and
which is the "official" address of it, the one on it's website, business
register, receipt, advertising etc.). This would be a lot of relations for
something that can be easily modelled by adding the address property as
used by the POI to the object and be done. From the relation you will not
be able to construct actual address strings like "Foo Street 33-35" because
this could mean things like "33A, 33B, 33C, 35" or "33, 34, 35", or "33,
35", etc.

Even for simple cases, I would like to tag whether they are representing an
entrance (entrance=yes/main or barrier=gate) or not (entrance=no, these are
either windows or former entrances now closed or potential future
entrances, and on top of this, situations that shouldn't get a housenumber
according to current legislation, but already have one). I am also
interested in adding details like level=1 (I see the absence of level as
level=0 and the default, but add level=1 for first floor entrances. This is
useful to understand situations where the sequence of numbers seem "odd" on
the map, but actually are accurate).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180511/ff0796f7/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list