[Tagging] RFC 2 - addr:interval
pla16021 at gmail.com
Thu Jan 7 20:30:35 UTC 2021
On Thu, 7 Jan 2021 at 18:12, Peter Elderson <pelderson at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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,
I didn't see any explicit suggestion that we would need regexes in house
number ranges. I did see that some of the examples given led me to
conclude that regexes would be one way of doing it.
Take 27-35. Is it 27, 28, 29,,..,35? Or 27, 29, 31, 33, 35? Or the atomic
address 27-35, with the address of the next building being 27-37? Of
the atomic address 27-35 with the address of the next building
being 29-35? I haven't seen any example given here of that
.last one, but I've seen the others. I can conceive of weirder
If we're going to be able to specify these in a way that software
tools can understand, indicating which parts change and which
parts don't, regexes would be a precise, concise way to do it.
They'd just be very difficult for most ordinary mappers to enter
There are those of us who see that regexes would solve the
problem elegantly, concisely and precisely yet hope we don't
end up having to use them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging