[Talk-us] Addressing Question

[Mike N.]

> Ian Dees wrote:
>> * Ok, not "impossible", but the import size would triple and the CPU
>> time to compute the new addressing-only ways might make it hard for
>> the "regular mapper" to do.
> But for no added code and editor complexity.

   If it's just an issue of CPU time, I would be happy to set up a box to 
assist since it would be a 1-time import.

> IMHO the only decent alternative is using a relation for each address
> interpolation-range, with the nodes at the ends of the range and the way
> itself as members.
> This is roughly half as expensive as the Karlsruhe interpolation ways,
> and reduces the visual clutter in the editors. It is also insensitive to
> way direction reversal.

   If the goal is to reduce visual clutter in editors, what about when all 
are converted to house numbers?   Do we have to change house numbers to 
relations to hide them from editors and viewers?   Then it becomes an editor 
problem to make them accessible to ordinary people who need to enter 
corrections.   So the editors render them as 'visual clutter' to make them 
accessible; now we're right back where we started, but with extra addressing 
schemes for map consumers to decode.