[Talk-GB] Quarterly Project: Addresses and Postcodes

Lester Caine lester at lsces.co.uk
Thu Oct 19 14:27:55 UTC 2017


On 19/10/17 14:31, Dave F wrote:
> On 19/10/2017 12:04, Lester Caine wrote:
>> On 19/10/17 11:35, Adam Snape wrote:
>>> Doesn't its location within the UK make an explicit UK tag unnecessary?
>> But when reading a single object tags do you know just where it is? Some
>> other mechanism has to return the 'inside boundary' data which takes
>> processing power.
> 
> OSM is geospatially aware. Nominatim have stated that it's not intensive
> processing & prefer it over is_in*. If unwilling to use 'inside
> boundary' coding it requires *every* object to have multiple location
> tags for *every* search boundary. Expecting mappers to add this enormous
> amount of data is selfish.

The reverse of that is that there are a large number of boundaries that
have yet to be mapped and in some instances may be difficult to map at
all. I'm not suggesting that mappers add any more tags than useful and
easy to add. What I AM suggesting is that 'Expecting mappers to add this
enormous amount of data is ...' unnecessary when some key tags will
cross reference the rest of the data! And where linked data changes then
one does not have to address every object, just the top record.

Yes automation can manage and change multiple records in parallel and
fill multiple tags from the one entry, but does all that information
have to be stored raw in OSM WHEN the processing can just as easily
provide it?

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk



More information about the Talk-GB mailing list