[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Phone)

[Paul Allen]

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 20:49, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> yes , of course, sorry for stepping on your toes, I was being sarcastic to
> better make the point, but I am aware that there is some use for this (even
> around here it may occur that a house has a name but not a number).
>

Not normally a problem in iD anyway, because it has a set of fields for
entering address details.
Except when it doesn't, because the authors decided that particular type of
object shouldn't
have an address.  And even that isn't a great problem, because entering
addr: into the bare
tag area and pressing tab on the first suggestion gets the set of address
fields to appear.
Except when it doesn't because the authors decided that particular type of
object really
shouldn't have an address under any circumstances whatsoever, then you have
to enter
everything via bare tags (if you can remember the key values).

Something I found out a few hours ago when I added a watermill.  A working
watermill.  With
an address.  It seems that iD thinks watermills shouldn't have addresses
under any
circumstances whatsoever.

>
> Statistically, there are 95 million housenumbers and 690.000 housenames in
> the db as of now.
>

I'd guess a lot of those 690,000 are in Wales, going by my experience.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20191008/0744fb84/attachment-0001.html>