[Tagging] RFC 2 - addr:interval

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Thu Jan 7 19:33:08 UTC 2021


Agreed. What if current use can be incorporated, optionally, into a larger scheme? So existing simple strings keep the same meaning, but more complicated cases can also be accommodated? Then only the complicated cases, which can not be handled now, need some extra care. 
In my area of the world, this would certainly help, if it enables search engines to pinpoint housenumbers in a range.

Peter Elderson

> Op 7 jan. 2021 om 19:30 heeft Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jan 7, 2021, 19:09 by pelderson at gmail.com:
> Jmapb <jmapb at gmx.com>:
> We don't want housenumbers to turn into regexes.
> 
> That's a strawman argument, and an argumentum ad populum. I did not see anybody suggesting regexp in housenumbers, that's the strawman, and We is the argumentum ad populum, but I'll let that go because I agree!
> 
> However, meaningful punctiation is not regexp, and this would not be the first case in OSM. 
>  
> I can state it in more accurate way: 
> 
> if I am entering single housenumber with weird characters such as ( ) or | or ' or "
> there should be no need to escape them.
> 
> As this would make it
> 
> - incomprehensible for most of mappers
> - redefine all existing addr:housenumber
> 
> New tag for storing extra info is preferable over redefining existing one.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210107/2e501555/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list