[OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[Sander Deryckere]

You can do things with that data besides rendering or using it as a route
location.

If the data is more or less complete, you can process it to get the number
of addresses on a street or in an area (for example, if you want to
distribute a folder to the entire street).
Or as a postal service, you can check if that address needs a flat number,
and suggest a list of flats to the users.

Like that, I always considered the values worth to be in OSM, even if it's
all on the same door/building. Though it's obviously a lot less important
than housenumbers.

Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 14:47 schreef Marc M. <marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com>:

> if one building have 2 entrance, it's useful to describe with entrance
> need to be used to reach this flats number.
> but having all flats number on the building or on one-only entrance,
> is like "to reach the inside of the building, reach the building".
> it's a bit like adding entrance=yes on the building to say that a
> building has an entrance somewhere, you don't add any real information.
>
> so at this place, I would not have added any addr:flats which would have
> solved the problem of rendering :) I will only use it in the case of a
> building with more than one entrance, and so addr:flats on the entrance
> does not disturb the display of addr:housenumber for the whole building.
>
> Le 15.06.20 à 13:55, Lionel Giard a écrit :
> > The tagging is correct, it is just not supposed to be on area from the
> > wiki perspective. But indeed I don't see why it is incorrect when a
> > building is only containing this series of flats and only one entrance ?
> > And if that's incorrect why are they rendering addr:flats on area and
> > not node ?! ^^'
> >
> > Le lun. 15 juin 2020 à 13:32, joost schouppe <joost.schouppe at gmail.com
> > <mailto:joost.schouppe at gmail.com>> a écrit :
> >
> >     Most of this data comes from the GRB import, I would guess. So it
> >     comes from CRAB. We use the addr:flats to map the "subaddresses".
> >     It seems a little weird to not be able to add the subaddresses on
> >     the same object that has the main address.
> >     The CRAB import tool mentioned this as an optional tag, that is not
> >     so useful for OSM:
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AGIV_CRAB_Import#Optional_tags.2C_provided_by_the_tool
> >     I would concur that the quality of the data is not good enough to
> >     import it.
> >     Both examples come from endless_autumn, who did a rather
> >     quick-and-dirty GRB import - a lot of which was reverted.
> >     The GRB-import-validator Midgard made actually flags the flats tag
> >     as "consider removing" as well.
> >     That said, the wiki doesn't say much about the logic of
> >     "subaddresses", maybe we shouldn't use the addr:flats tag -at all-
> >     for subaddresses?
> >
> >
> >     Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:22 schreef Sander Deryckere
> >     <sanderd17 at gmail.com <mailto:sanderd17 at gmail.com>>:
> >
> >         Hmm,
> >
> >         it seems indeed that, according to the wiki, this should not be
> >         placed on areas.
> >         However, I expect that in all these cases, all flats are
> >         accessible behind the same door.
> >         So correcting the tag will have the same effect.
> >
> >         Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:12 schreef Marc M.
> >         <marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com <mailto:marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com>>:
> >
> >             Hello,
> >
> >             Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
> >             > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102
> >
> >             https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
> >             this look like a mistake :
> >             wiki :  marking range of numbers of flats behind a door,
> >             but the object isn't a door, it's a building
> >
> >             maybe osm.carto should avoid to render tagging mistake and
> >             target
> >             only node and maybe only with entrance or door tag
> >
> >             Regards,
> >             Marc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20200615/ec693929/attachment.htm>