[OSM-talk] Adding Addresses to OSM

[TM]

Yes, it should certainly need to be distinguishable as an "address
node", although this can be achieved with a tag as you originally
suggested. After all, this is how we handle POI's for instance. The
separate table idea was actually suggested (or at least implied) by
Andy, who was reluctant to clutter the data with nodes for every house.
Me, I was merely agreeing with that.

One reason to separate the address nodes from the road data is the
amount of data -- and work -- involved. Creating a street map of the
world is pretty ambitious, and mapping every house is downright
ludicrous. But if someone wants to do it, we certainly don't want to
discourage them. We just need to find a suitable way to accommodate it.
This could mean special tags, a separate node type, a separate database,
a separate project etc.

If anyone wants to add addresses, the unrestricted key/value system
allows them to do so. However, it would be good to get some consensus on
the keys and values to use.

    /   TM

Michael Robinson wrote:
> Maybe there should be an "address node" that can be handled
> differently from other nodes if necessary.  Would placing address data
> in a different table be simply for speed of querying it?
>
> Michael Robinson
> mrobinson at fuzzymuzzle.com <mailto:mrobinson at fuzzymuzzle.com>
> www.fuzzymuzzle.com <http://www.fuzzymuzzle.com>
>
> On 9/12/06, *TM* <tm at 8k.se <mailto:tm at 8k.se>> wrote:
>
>     I have thought about that too. The way I see it is that the data
>     should
>     be as complete as possible, so that whatever tool which needs it can
>     operate on a suitable subset rather than the complete dataset. For
>     instance, a route planning application would not need to know
>     about all
>     nodes along a way, but only the junctions (a directed graph with the
>     direction of each path. Note, however, that any reasonably intuitive
>     graphical representation would require knowledge of the full set of
>     nodes/segments.).
>
>     Although I think most people will be busy with streets and roads for
>     now, if anyone wants to add individual addresses the free-form tag
>     system allows for this. However, it would probably be a good idea
>     not to
>     add these nodes to the way.
>
>     Once the data is stored in some recognisable way, we could try to make
>     sense of it and convert the nodes to a new type or move them to a
>     separate db table. Or whatever seems best when we've had some
>     debate on
>     the issue...
>
>         /   TM
>
>     Andy Robinson wrote:
>     > This is one of these fundamental aspects of a fully fledges
>     street index for
>     > a fully fledged street map, ie being able to turn a full address
>     into a
>     > location.
>     >
>     > Personally I would prefer not to see the map data delivered to
>     editors
>     > cluttered with extraneous nodes for every address. Clearly the
>     db needs to
>     > hold nodes with address data though.
>     >
>     > What are others thoughts on this?
>     >
>     > Cheers,
>     >
>     > Andy
>     >
>     > Andy Robinson
>     > Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk
>     <mailto:Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk>
>     >
>     >
>     >> -----Original Message-----
>     >> From: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org
>     <mailto:talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org> [mailto:talk- <mailto:talk->
>     >> bounces at openstreetmap.org <mailto:bounces at openstreetmap.org>]
>     On Behalf Of Michael Robinson
>     >> Sent: 12 September 2006 5:47 PM
>     >> To: talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk at openstreetmap.org>
>     >> Subject: [OSM-talk] Adding Addresses to OSM
>     >>
>     >> Is there a standardized way to add street addresses to OSM?  It
>     would seem
>     >> that the easiest way would be to add a node to the way that the
>     address is
>     >> on.  Then add an "address" key for the address number and some
>     sort of key
>     >> to say which side of the road the address is on.  Or if there
>     were a
>     >> database of addresses and their lat/lon that could be important
>     instead.
>     >>
>     >> --
>     >> Michael Robinson
>     >> mrobinson at fuzzymuzzle.com <mailto:mrobinson at fuzzymuzzle.com>
>     >> www.fuzzymuzzle.com <http://www.fuzzymuzzle.com>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> --
>     >> No virus found in this incoming message.
>     >> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>     >> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.3/445 - Release Date:
>     11/09/2006
>     >>
>     >>
>     >
>     >
>     >
>