jochen at remote.org
Tue Dec 9 07:51:56 GMT 2008
On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 03:37:00PM -0800, SteveC wrote:
> On 8 Dec 2008, at 13:41, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > Hi,
> > SteveC wrote:
> >> "nodes on a way but not a relation" schema needs to have
> >> addr:street=foo on the addressing way ?
> > The original idea was to (by default) assume that the street name is
> > the "name" tag of the nearest highway (i.e. no addr:* required), and
> > that you can optionally set addr:street on the node to make it 100%
> > clear.
> I don't mean the node, I mean when you have numbers on a way, it would
> seem to make sense to make the way have addr:street rather than all
> the nodes.
Are you talking about the addr:interpolation way? We specifically
decided to not put any more information on the addr:interpolation-way,
because that would mean that every software had to look for the
addr:*-Tags in the interpolation way *and* on the nodes which makes
things a bit more complex. Also there are more cases where this can go
wrong if there is conflicting information. And everybody who will not
do the interpolation anway can just ignore those interpolation ways
Jochen Topf jochen at remote.org http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298
More information about the talk