[OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium

[Jo]

The remark I made was about the associatedStreet relation. The name of the
street is put in the name tag, just like it is done on the ways forming the
street. So all other tags are addr:country, addr:city, addr:postcode, but
the streetname goes into name.

Everyone is free to add addr:street to the house and POI objects as well.
It's creating an unfortunate redundancy, but as you mention we seem to be
needing that for editors like iLoe and Vespucci which don't support
relations (yet).
Why you need it on Potlatch eludes me, as that one does support relations,
but since I don't have experience with it anymore, I should probably shut
up about it.

I do think associatedStreet relations still have a function to avoid
duplicating/multiplicating the country, city and postcode information that
make addresses complete and possibly to be able to perform quality control
on the data. The redundancy can help to check whether the data is
consistent.

Personally I don't like repeating data over and over, as it makes it easier
to make mistakes and when a streetname changes it becomes necessary to
change it in many places.

@Jan-Willem: I wouldn't take away the addr:street from the houses and POIs
when you add them to an associatedStreet relation. I tried that once, a few
years ago, and had to revert because portable editors didn't support
relations (and they still don't) and, when in the field, people are missing
that information then. So it's probably best to keep that redundancy in the
data.

Jo



2013/1/7 Ivo De Broeck <ivo.debroeck at gmail.com>

> I don't agree with that. Its necessary to have addr:street for every
> address. When you use potlatch on the computer or iLOE on your smartphone
> its easy to bring in new data or correct the data. The associated street is
> redundant (and as i saw in Bierbeek often wrong).
>
> For me it is most important that new users have the possibility of
> introduce new data in a simple way (copy-paste the streetname in
> addr:street). Its a pity that most of the people here give only
> sophisticated solutions for very simple problems.
>
> If you don't make it easy for the contributors, you will never get
> addresses from then.
>
>
> 2013/1/7 Jo <winfixit at gmail.com>
>
>> The associatedStreet relation has the streetname in 'name', not in
>> addr:street. I also found some relations where this was done incorrectly.
>>
>> It is possible to fix all of them in one go. Advise me if you want me to
>> do so.
>>
>> Polyglot
>>
>>
>> 2013/1/7 Joren <joren.libreoffice at telenet.be>
>>
>>> Op 07-01-13 00:35, Kurt Roeckx schreef:
>>>
>>>  On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 03:23:15PM +0100, Sander Deryckere wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The first thing you notice is that there are a lot of features with
>>>>> housenumber information, but without street information. While other
>>>>> information (such as city) can be determined from closed boundaries.
>>>>> It's
>>>>> often ambiguous and hard to determine the street from other OSM
>>>>> features.
>>>>>
>>>> Osmose counts alot of errors in Belgium because of that.  See:
>>>> http://osmose.openstreetmap.**fr/errors/graph.png?country=**belgium<http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/errors/graph.png?country=belgium>
>>>>
>>> http://tools.geofabrik.de/**osmi/?view=addresses&lon=4.**
>>> 41356&lat=51.10370&zoom=14&**baselayer=Geofabrik&opacity=1.**
>>> 00&overlays=no_addr_street,**street_not_found<http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresses&lon=4.41356&lat=51.10370&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik&opacity=1.00&overlays=no_addr_street,street_not_found>
>>>
>>> Geofabrik shows that there are many 'bugs' in the city 'Reet' ... but
>>> when I examine it, some/all houses are tagged with 'associatedStreet
>>> <streetname>, etc'...
>>> Is this the correct tagging, or do we need to delete that tag, and tag
>>> them with 'addr:street'?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> About 50% of those are because of missing addr:street or
>>>> associatedStreet relation.
>>>>
>>>> It would in general be a good thing that we try and fix all those
>>>> errors.
>>>>
>>>>  Thanks in advance,
>>> Joren
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> Talk-be mailing list
>>> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-be<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20130107/fd16af79/attachment.htm>