[Tagging] We should stop using hyphens to denote address ranges
pangose at riseup.net
Wed Aug 26 11:12:05 UTC 2020
Matthew Woehlke <mwoehlke.floss at gmail.com> skrev: (25 augusti 2020 15:25:19 CEST)
>On 24/08/2020 16.25, pangoSE wrote:
>> Martin Koppenhoefer skrev: (24 augusti 2020 02:16:27 CEST)
>>> Also useful when the POI is approximately placed (e.g. in a
>>> neighbouring building, happens quite often, at least as long as most
>>> POIs are not yet mapped)
>> Really? Can you link to an example? I have never come across a POI
>> that needed a special address. I would rather map to he entry in the
>> that case and put the address there.
>Just about any strip mall. For example, 42.8625, -73.7831. I can give
>least three other examples within 1000 *feet*; in a few miles, probably
>a dozen or more.
>Mapping stores in such cases practically requires mapping the *insides*
>of the buildings. It's much more typical to drop a POI in about the
>right place (either the middle of the store, or the entrance to the
>store). Yet, these *do* have distinct addresses.
>The same can easily happen with multi-unit dwellings.
>Also, mailboxes have addresses, but are unlikely to be mapped as ways
>due to their size.
>> The POI IMO cannot logically have an address itself, its a human
>> symbol for designating something of interest within a feature like a
>> building, park or whatever.
>...or its a somewhat abstracted representation of a building because no
>one has yet made the effort to map the building more precisely. BTW,
>it's not that unusual for detached houses to be mapped as POIs,
>especially when addresses are imported from GIS data that gives them
>only as points. Yes, in an ideal world everything of this nature would
>be mapped as a way, but that isn't always practical.
>> When the Swedish geosurvey sometime soon release all public adresses
>> for free we will have to merge them all with the buildings where
>...And what will you do if there is no building, and it isn't obvious
>how to add one (e.g. strip malls)? Not import that address at all?
>> thinking about it postal addresses follows land plots and legal
>boundaries and not POIs.
>Actually, AFAIK this is only partly true. Yes, the address "123 Cherry
>Lane" follows a plot, but I'm not aware of anything preventing me from
>erecting three structures on that plot and designating them "unit 1",
>"unit 3.14" and "unit gamma". This would be unusual on a residential
>plot, but not at all (well, sans my intentionally bizarre numbering)
>a commercial building.
I rest my case. Thanks for the examples. Could you help update the wikipage about POIs to reflect this?
More information about the Tagging