[Tagging] RFC 2 - addr:interval

Kevin Kenny kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com
Sun Jan 3 19:03:17 UTC 2021


On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 12:07 PM Sarah Hoffmann <lonvia at denofr.de> wrote:

> Implementing a simple numberical interval is just a question
> of doing it. I doubt, though, that more complex intervals like
> the 190-10|190-20 would ever get implemented. It's complex and
> again involves some guessing about which part actually contains
> the interval. There would have to be several thousands of uses
> to make it worthwile. I'd strongly recommend just sticking with
> mapping one address point per address in these cases instead of
> getting carried away with defining some complex format.
>
> So given that. addr:housenumber=<from>-<to> when addr:interval
> is present, is currently my favourite. It has the big advantage
> that it is both human and machine readable. Renderers who only
> want to display house nubmers don't need to care about addr:interval
> at all and leave it to humans to figure out what is meant. For
> those who do care about individual addresses, the format is simple
> enough to parse. The default for addr:interval should be 'no'
> because that's what most addr:housenumber are.


The only significant use of hyphenated housenumbers that I'm aware of is in
the Borough of Queens, New York City, where almost all addresses are
XXX-YY, where XXX is the number of the cross street and YY is the
housenumber on the block.  In that specific case, there's already been a
comprehensive import of building footprints, with their addresses, so it's
pretty much a non-problem there - there's no need for address
interpolation. For that reason, I don't think there's a real need for
interpolation between already-hyphenated housenumbers. Nevertheless, we
need to avoid misinterpreting each of the tens of thousands of hyphenated
housenumbers in that borough as ranges.  As long as there's a separate
indication that the number is an interval, and it doesn't default to being
an interval just because there's a hyphen, then I have no objection.

-- 
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210103/5f348d18/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list