[Talk-us] Address improvement through imports?

Martijn van Exel m at rtijn.org
Wed Nov 2 15:17:43 GMT 2011

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Steven Johnson <sejohnson8 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Up to now, we've been talking largely about addresses as point features.
> However, one thing I think would be good to have is block ranges on streets.
> What I mean is a tag that indicates this is the 1000 block, the 1100 block,
> the 1200 block, etc. Rather than being a point feature attached to
> buildings, it would be a tag associated with the way. It would be much
> easier to implement, make the map renderings much more presentable at small
> scales, and provide better address utility than presently exists.

Ranges are what 'all the others' use and are familiar territory for
all navigation applications. They rarely if ever rely on address
points and do interpolation, which works well in urban areas but can
be miles off in rural areas.

I think that ranges are good for a first iteration because they're
less cumbersome to collect and map. They do require cutting up the
ways at junctions like Richard mentions. Where there's no data
available to import and / or not a lot of local mappers, ranges may be
as good as it gets for OSM. Where there is good quality data to import
and/or enough dedicated mappers, they should be replaced by address
points, I think.

Another thought: the ranges could be derived from the cross streets,
couldn't they? At least here in Salt Lake the addresses on 900W
between 100S and 200S are all in the 100-200 range. And if they can be
derived, what use is it to duplicate the information?

martijn van exel
geospatial omnivore
1109 1st ave #2
salt lake city, ut 84103

More information about the Talk-us mailing list