[OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Addressing Question

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Apollinaris Schoell <aschoell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Don't know any place except in US where this has been done.
>
Even if it weren't done anywhere else (which it is, see below), there
are a lot of houses in the US.

>>> how is that easier than the Karlsruhe scheme?
>>
>> It's not really easier so much as more correct.
>
> why more correct?

Because arbitrarily locating a way 10 meters (or whatever) away from
the road centerline adds artificial precision.

> the address is an attribute of the house not an attribute of the street.

If you want to get technical an actual address is usually an attribute
of a mail delivery point, which may or may not correspond to a house.
But potential addresses (which are likely the data which we are
contemplating importing) are an attribute of the street.

If you want to just leave the data out of OSM altogether, fine.  That
might be a good idea.  Geocoders can use the data within the system it
was designed for.  But if you're going to import it into OSM, you
shouldn't add artificial precision to it.

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:41 PM, andrzej zaborowski <balrogg at gmail.com> wrote:
> If we're going to go into detail, no type of interpolation reflects
> reality, it's just interpolation.

I disagree.  An approximation of reality reflects reality.



On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Liz <edodd at billiau.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
>> Don't know any place except in US where this has been done.
> The rural numbering scheme used in Australia is an excellent example, as the
> potential number of addresses is the length of the road in km * 100, and there
> is no expectation that any number of the addresses will be used.

I'm curious:  Does Australia use left/right numbering?