[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - addr:interpolation on closed ways and nodes

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 at 10:26, Brian M. Sperlongano <zelonewolf at gmail.com>
wrote:

> In that case, I would think that a range/interval scheme simply wouldn't
> apply, and you'd need to tag each one.  Unless there's some kind of
> reliable rule that can be composed.  Though I could see there being an
> address range like "23a|23e" as being quite viable.
>
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 6:54 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <
> dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> an additional complexity around here arises from numbers that
>> subsequently were squeezed into the numbering, so that you cannot actually
>> know how many numbers there are between 23 and 27, there could be just 25,
>> or also 23a, 23b, 23c, 23d and 23e
>>
>
Would it still work when you have missing letters / numbers?

eg https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/-27.98318/153.00062

You'll notice there's no 1B or 2A, what should be 3A & 3B are 14 & 9 of the
intersecting street, before going back to 3C, & there's another house
interrupting the 5s!

Thanks

Graeme
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201228/3a0e1839/attachment.htm>