[Talk-GB] Google maps added addresses!
jpsa at cantab.net
Tue Dec 29 10:42:14 UTC 2020
FWIW, my technique has been to map the building outlines from aerial
photography (having established any necessary imagery offset), then
print that out on paper and walk round the houses, noting the house
numbers and where the front doors are. Then, add additional front door
node(s) to the building outline areas, and attach the address
information to those nodes.
I think that's more 'honest' than trying to divide a semi-, terrace, or
more complicated building into separate house areas, when I've got no
idea where the dividing walls are internally. And it has the added
benefit of pointing a map user at the main entrance, which is probably
what they want to find.
On 29/12/2020 10:25, Michael Collinson wrote:
> +++1 to mapping addresses as standalone nodes!
> While it is an alternative accepted style to put them on buildings, I
> personally loathe it. A building is a building, an address is an
> address. A one-to-one relation is common but not 100%. The address may
> not even be logically applicable to a building, examples: schools (a
> cluster of buildings on a site), recreation grounds (perhaps no
> building at all).
> Dividing a building vertically for the purpose of address in messy.
> Yes, there is some logic to the concept of separate living/working
> volumes but then that should apply to horizontal division as will,
> common in some parts of the world. For me, a semi-detached house is a
> semi-detached house and a terrace is a terrace.
> And the worst thing, and my main motivation for writing, is that is
> destroys simple 3-D modelling,
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_buildings . A
> semi-detached house with a hipped roof becomes impossible to model if
> two conjoined buildings or even building parts as far as I can see (?).
> I suggest always modelling addresses as separate nodes placed in a
> logical place for navigation.
> A jolly Christmas rant brought to you by Mike. Best wishes to all.
> On 2020-12-29 09:28, Simon Poole wrote:
>> At the danger of pointing out the blatantly obvious: you can easily
>> survey and add addresses as stand alone nodes without adding
>> buildings before.
>> It is quite a fast process and, at least for me, is only limited by
>> walking speed and getting distracted by other details which you tend
>> to only see when surveying on foot. It is what we used to do before
>> aerial imagery was widely available and will result in fully
>> functional routing. Given how painful correcting building geometries
>> is I would always prefer an address node over mapping a building
>> outline from a sub-par source.
>> Am 28.12.2020 um 17:21 schrieb Rob Nickerson:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I just spotted that Google Maps has added house numbers to their map
>>> of the UK. They are all over the place - does anyone recognise the
>>> What can we do to improve coverage of addresses in OSM? I notice
>>> that we have some pretty good aerial imagery now. Should we see if
>>> we can get good building outline from an AI / machine learning
>>> approach? If the quality is good we can then use these to help add
>>> addresses. For example we can ask new mappers to add addresses using
>>> tools such as StreetComplete.
>>> Any thoughts much appreciated. I have a feeling that if we can come
>>> up with a plan we may be able to get some help from several of the
>>> big tech companies now interested in the UK. It would be better if
>>> we were steering this rather than it happening to us.
>>> Best wishes,
>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-GB