Re: [OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[Pieter Fiers]

Hey all,

> Hello,
>
> Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
> this look like a mistake :
> wiki : marking range of numbers of flats behind a door,
> but the object isn't a door, it's a building

Huh, I edited that region recently.

When importing via JOSM the addr:flats don't stand out that much because it 
just renders the housenumbers. I usually don't even notice until uploading. I 
think I'll be converting the obviously old imported addr:flats' in Leuven to 
"note=possible addr:flats: ... " with a FIXME.

On 16/06/2020 10:47, joost schouppe wrote:

> Sander,
> I absolutely agree with this!
> However, as much as I am a fan of CRAB, I don't really trust the 
> subaddresses. They caused me way too many headaches when I still worked in 
> the city of Antwerp. Anecdotally, I've surveyed one building for subaddresses 
> near me, and there was zero correlation between what was on the post boxes 
> and what was in CRAB. So while I agree the info is useful, I wouldn't 
> recommend importing it. And a cursory glance at the data shows that almost 
> all addr:flats we have, are in fact imported. See 
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/V7K - the vast majority here has the tell-tale 
> source:geometry:date tag from the GRB import; the ones I checked that haven't 
> seem to be CRAB-imports.
>
> Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 14:59 schreef Sander Deryckere :
>
>> You can do things with that data besides rendering or using it as a route 
>> location.
>>
>> If the data is more or less complete, you can process it to get the number 
>> of addresses on a street or in an area (for example, if you want to 
>> distribute a folder to the entire street).
>> Or as a postal service, you can check if that address needs a flat number, 
>> and suggest a list of flats to the users.
>>
>> Like that, I always considered the values worth to be in OSM, even if it's 
>> all on the same door/building. Though it's obviously a lot less important 
>> than housenumbers.
>>
>> Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 14:47 schreef Marc M. :
>>
>>> if one building have 2 entrance, it's useful to describe with entrance
>>> need to be used to reach this flats number.
>>> but having all flats number on the building or on one-only entrance,
>>> is like "to reach the inside of the building, reach the building".
>>> it's a bit like adding entrance=yes on the building to say that a
>>> building has an entrance somewhere, you don't add any real information.
>>>
>>> so at this place, I would not have added any addr:flats which would have
>>> solved the problem of rendering :) I will only use it in the case of a
>>> building with more than one entrance, and so addr:flats on the entrance
>>> does not disturb the display of addr:housenumber for the whole building.
>>>
>>> Le 15.06.20 à 13:55, Lionel Giard a écrit :
 The tagging is correct, it is just not supposed to be on area from the
 wiki perspective. But indeed I don't see why it is incorrect when a
 building is only containing this series of flats and only one entrance ?
 And if that's incorrect why are they rendering addr:flats on area and
 not node ?! ^^'

 Le lun. 15 juin 2020 à 13:32, joost schouppe >>> > a écrit :

 Most of this data comes from the GRB import, I would guess. So it
 comes from CRAB. We use the addr:flats to map the "subaddresses".
 It seems a little weird to not be able to add the subaddresses on
 the same object that has the main address.
 The CRAB import tool mentioned this as an optional tag, that is not
 so useful for OSM:
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AGIV_CRAB_Import#Optional_tags.2C_provided_by_the_tool
 I would concur that the quality of the data is not good enough to
 import it.
 Both examples come from endless_autumn, who did a rather
 quick-and-dirty GRB import - a lot of which was reverted.
 The GRB-import-validator Midgard made actually flags the flats tag
 as "consider removing" as well.
 That said, the wiki doesn't say much about the logic of
 "subaddresses", maybe we shouldn't use the addr:flats tag -at all-
 for subaddresses?


 Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:22 schreef Sander Deryckere
 mailto:sander...@gmail.com>>:

 Hmm,

 it seems indeed that, according to the wiki, this should not be
 placed on areas.
 However, I expect that in all these cases, all flats are
 accessible behind the same door.
 So correcting the tag will have the same effect.

 Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:12 schreef Marc M.
 mailto:marc_marc_...@hotmail.com>>:

 Hello,

 Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
 > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102

 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
 this look like a mistake :
 wiki : marking range of numbers of flats 

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[joost schouppe]

Sander,
I absolutely agree with this!
However, as much as I am a fan of CRAB, I don't really trust the
subaddresses. They caused me way too many headaches when I still worked in
the city of Antwerp. Anecdotally, I've surveyed one building for
subaddresses near me, and there was zero correlation between what was on
the post boxes and what was in CRAB. So while I agree the info is useful, I
wouldn't recommend importing it. And a cursory glance at the data shows
that almost all addr:flats we have, are in fact imported. See
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/V7K - the vast majority here has the tell-tale
source:geometry:date tag from the GRB import; the ones I checked that
haven't seem to be CRAB-imports.

Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 14:59 schreef Sander Deryckere :

> You can do things with that data besides rendering or using it as a route
> location.
>
> If the data is more or less complete, you can process it to get the number
> of addresses on a street or in an area (for example, if you want to
> distribute a folder to the entire street).
> Or as a postal service, you can check if that address needs a flat number,
> and suggest a list of flats to the users.
>
> Like that, I always considered the values worth to be in OSM, even if it's
> all on the same door/building. Though it's obviously a lot less important
> than housenumbers.
>
> Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 14:47 schreef Marc M. :
>
>> if one building have 2 entrance, it's useful to describe with entrance
>> need to be used to reach this flats number.
>> but having all flats number on the building or on one-only entrance,
>> is like "to reach the inside of the building, reach the building".
>> it's a bit like adding entrance=yes on the building to say that a
>> building has an entrance somewhere, you don't add any real information.
>>
>> so at this place, I would not have added any addr:flats which would have
>> solved the problem of rendering :) I will only use it in the case of a
>> building with more than one entrance, and so addr:flats on the entrance
>> does not disturb the display of addr:housenumber for the whole building.
>>
>> Le 15.06.20 à 13:55, Lionel Giard a écrit :
>> > The tagging is correct, it is just not supposed to be on area from the
>> > wiki perspective. But indeed I don't see why it is incorrect when a
>> > building is only containing this series of flats and only one entrance ?
>> > And if that's incorrect why are they rendering addr:flats on area and
>> > not node ?! ^^'
>> >
>> > Le lun. 15 juin 2020 à 13:32, joost schouppe > > > a écrit :
>> >
>> > Most of this data comes from the GRB import, I would guess. So it
>> > comes from CRAB. We use the addr:flats to map the "subaddresses".
>> > It seems a little weird to not be able to add the subaddresses on
>> > the same object that has the main address.
>> > The CRAB import tool mentioned this as an optional tag, that is not
>> > so useful for OSM:
>> >
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AGIV_CRAB_Import#Optional_tags.2C_provided_by_the_tool
>> > I would concur that the quality of the data is not good enough to
>> > import it.
>> > Both examples come from endless_autumn, who did a rather
>> > quick-and-dirty GRB import - a lot of which was reverted.
>> > The GRB-import-validator Midgard made actually flags the flats tag
>> > as "consider removing" as well.
>> > That said, the wiki doesn't say much about the logic of
>> > "subaddresses", maybe we shouldn't use the addr:flats tag -at all-
>> > for subaddresses?
>> >
>> >
>> > Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:22 schreef Sander Deryckere
>> > mailto:sander...@gmail.com>>:
>> >
>> > Hmm,
>> >
>> > it seems indeed that, according to the wiki, this should not be
>> > placed on areas.
>> > However, I expect that in all these cases, all flats are
>> > accessible behind the same door.
>> > So correcting the tag will have the same effect.
>> >
>> > Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:12 schreef Marc M.
>> > mailto:marc_marc_...@hotmail.com>>:
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
>> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102
>> >
>> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
>> > this look like a mistake :
>> > wiki :  marking range of numbers of flats behind a door,
>> > but the object isn't a door, it's a building
>> >
>> > maybe osm.carto should avoid to render tagging mistake and
>> > target
>> > only node and maybe only with entrance or door tag
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Marc
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> 

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[Sander Deryckere]

You can do things with that data besides rendering or using it as a route
location.

If the data is more or less complete, you can process it to get the number
of addresses on a street or in an area (for example, if you want to
distribute a folder to the entire street).
Or as a postal service, you can check if that address needs a flat number,
and suggest a list of flats to the users.

Like that, I always considered the values worth to be in OSM, even if it's
all on the same door/building. Though it's obviously a lot less important
than housenumbers.

Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 14:47 schreef Marc M. :

> if one building have 2 entrance, it's useful to describe with entrance
> need to be used to reach this flats number.
> but having all flats number on the building or on one-only entrance,
> is like "to reach the inside of the building, reach the building".
> it's a bit like adding entrance=yes on the building to say that a
> building has an entrance somewhere, you don't add any real information.
>
> so at this place, I would not have added any addr:flats which would have
> solved the problem of rendering :) I will only use it in the case of a
> building with more than one entrance, and so addr:flats on the entrance
> does not disturb the display of addr:housenumber for the whole building.
>
> Le 15.06.20 à 13:55, Lionel Giard a écrit :
> > The tagging is correct, it is just not supposed to be on area from the
> > wiki perspective. But indeed I don't see why it is incorrect when a
> > building is only containing this series of flats and only one entrance ?
> > And if that's incorrect why are they rendering addr:flats on area and
> > not node ?! ^^'
> >
> > Le lun. 15 juin 2020 à 13:32, joost schouppe  > > a écrit :
> >
> > Most of this data comes from the GRB import, I would guess. So it
> > comes from CRAB. We use the addr:flats to map the "subaddresses".
> > It seems a little weird to not be able to add the subaddresses on
> > the same object that has the main address.
> > The CRAB import tool mentioned this as an optional tag, that is not
> > so useful for OSM:
> >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AGIV_CRAB_Import#Optional_tags.2C_provided_by_the_tool
> > I would concur that the quality of the data is not good enough to
> > import it.
> > Both examples come from endless_autumn, who did a rather
> > quick-and-dirty GRB import - a lot of which was reverted.
> > The GRB-import-validator Midgard made actually flags the flats tag
> > as "consider removing" as well.
> > That said, the wiki doesn't say much about the logic of
> > "subaddresses", maybe we shouldn't use the addr:flats tag -at all-
> > for subaddresses?
> >
> >
> > Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:22 schreef Sander Deryckere
> > mailto:sander...@gmail.com>>:
> >
> > Hmm,
> >
> > it seems indeed that, according to the wiki, this should not be
> > placed on areas.
> > However, I expect that in all these cases, all flats are
> > accessible behind the same door.
> > So correcting the tag will have the same effect.
> >
> > Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:12 schreef Marc M.
> > mailto:marc_marc_...@hotmail.com>>:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
> > this look like a mistake :
> > wiki :  marking range of numbers of flats behind a door,
> > but the object isn't a door, it's a building
> >
> > maybe osm.carto should avoid to render tagging mistake and
> > target
> > only node and maybe only with entrance or door tag
> >
> > Regards,
> > Marc
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[Marc M.]

if one building have 2 entrance, it's useful to describe with entrance
need to be used to reach this flats number.
but having all flats number on the building or on one-only entrance,
is like "to reach the inside of the building, reach the building".
it's a bit like adding entrance=yes on the building to say that a
building has an entrance somewhere, you don't add any real information.

so at this place, I would not have added any addr:flats which would have
solved the problem of rendering :) I will only use it in the case of a
building with more than one entrance, and so addr:flats on the entrance
does not disturb the display of addr:housenumber for the whole building.

Le 15.06.20 à 13:55, Lionel Giard a écrit :
> The tagging is correct, it is just not supposed to be on area from the
> wiki perspective. But indeed I don't see why it is incorrect when a
> building is only containing this series of flats and only one entrance ?
> And if that's incorrect why are they rendering addr:flats on area and
> not node ?! ^^'
> 
> Le lun. 15 juin 2020 à 13:32, joost schouppe  > a écrit :
> 
> Most of this data comes from the GRB import, I would guess. So it
> comes from CRAB. We use the addr:flats to map the "subaddresses".
> It seems a little weird to not be able to add the subaddresses on
> the same object that has the main address.
> The CRAB import tool mentioned this as an optional tag, that is not
> so useful for OSM:
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AGIV_CRAB_Import#Optional_tags.2C_provided_by_the_tool
> I would concur that the quality of the data is not good enough to
> import it.
> Both examples come from endless_autumn, who did a rather
> quick-and-dirty GRB import - a lot of which was reverted.
> The GRB-import-validator Midgard made actually flags the flats tag
> as "consider removing" as well.
> That said, the wiki doesn't say much about the logic of
> "subaddresses", maybe we shouldn't use the addr:flats tag -at all-
> for subaddresses?
> 
> 
> Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:22 schreef Sander Deryckere
> mailto:sander...@gmail.com>>:
> 
> Hmm,
> 
> it seems indeed that, according to the wiki, this should not be
> placed on areas.
> However, I expect that in all these cases, all flats are
> accessible behind the same door.
> So correcting the tag will have the same effect.
> 
> Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:12 schreef Marc M.
> mailto:marc_marc_...@hotmail.com>>:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
> this look like a mistake :
> wiki :  marking range of numbers of flats behind a door,
> but the object isn't a door, it's a building
> 
> maybe osm.carto should avoid to render tagging mistake and
> target
> only node and maybe only with entrance or door tag
> 
> Regards,
> Marc

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[Lionel Giard]

The tagging is correct, it is just not supposed to be on area from the wiki
perspective. But indeed I don't see why it is incorrect when a building is
only containing this series of flats and only one entrance ? And if that's
incorrect why are they rendering addr:flats on area and not node ?! ^^'

Le lun. 15 juin 2020 à 13:32, joost schouppe  a
écrit :

> Most of this data comes from the GRB import, I would guess. So it comes
> from CRAB. We use the addr:flats to map the "subaddresses".
> It seems a little weird to not be able to add the subaddresses on the same
> object that has the main address.
> The CRAB import tool mentioned this as an optional tag, that is not so
> useful for OSM:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AGIV_CRAB_Import#Optional_tags.2C_provided_by_the_tool
> I would concur that the quality of the data is not good enough to import
> it.
> Both examples come from endless_autumn, who did a rather quick-and-dirty
> GRB import - a lot of which was reverted.
> The GRB-import-validator Midgard made actually flags the flats tag as
> "consider removing" as well.
> That said, the wiki doesn't say much about the logic of "subaddresses",
> maybe we shouldn't use the addr:flats tag -at all- for subaddresses?
>
>
> Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:22 schreef Sander Deryckere  >:
>
>> Hmm,
>>
>> it seems indeed that, according to the wiki, this should not be placed on
>> areas.
>> However, I expect that in all these cases, all flats are accessible
>> behind the same door.
>> So correcting the tag will have the same effect.
>>
>> Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:12 schreef Marc M. :
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
>>> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102
>>>
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
>>> this look like a mistake :
>>> wiki :  marking range of numbers of flats behind a door,
>>> but the object isn't a door, it's a building
>>>
>>> maybe osm.carto should avoid to render tagging mistake and target
>>> only node and maybe only with entrance or door tag
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Marc
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-be mailing list
>>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
>
>
> --
> Joost Schouppe
> OpenStreetMap  |
> Twitter  | LinkedIn
>  | Meetup
> 
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[joost schouppe]

Most of this data comes from the GRB import, I would guess. So it comes
from CRAB. We use the addr:flats to map the "subaddresses".
It seems a little weird to not be able to add the subaddresses on the same
object that has the main address.
The CRAB import tool mentioned this as an optional tag, that is not so
useful for OSM:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AGIV_CRAB_Import#Optional_tags.2C_provided_by_the_tool
I would concur that the quality of the data is not good enough to import it.
Both examples come from endless_autumn, who did a rather quick-and-dirty
GRB import - a lot of which was reverted.
The GRB-import-validator Midgard made actually flags the flats tag as
"consider removing" as well.
That said, the wiki doesn't say much about the logic of "subaddresses",
maybe we shouldn't use the addr:flats tag -at all- for subaddresses?


Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:22 schreef Sander Deryckere :

> Hmm,
>
> it seems indeed that, according to the wiki, this should not be placed on
> areas.
> However, I expect that in all these cases, all flats are accessible behind
> the same door.
> So correcting the tag will have the same effect.
>
> Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:12 schreef Marc M. :
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
>> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
>> this look like a mistake :
>> wiki :  marking range of numbers of flats behind a door,
>> but the object isn't a door, it's a building
>>
>> maybe osm.carto should avoid to render tagging mistake and target
>> only node and maybe only with entrance or door tag
>>
>> Regards,
>> Marc
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>


-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[Sander Deryckere]

Hmm,

it seems indeed that, according to the wiki, this should not be placed on
areas.
However, I expect that in all these cases, all flats are accessible behind
the same door.
So correcting the tag will have the same effect.

Op ma 15 jun. 2020 om 09:12 schreef Marc M. :

> Hello,
>
> Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
> this look like a mistake :
> wiki :  marking range of numbers of flats behind a door,
> but the object isn't a door, it's a building
>
> maybe osm.carto should avoid to render tagging mistake and target
> only node and maybe only with entrance or door tag
>
> Regards,
> Marc
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[Marc M.]

Hello,

Le 15.06.20 à 08:23, Sander Deryckere a écrit :
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/499694374
this look like a mistake :
wiki :  marking range of numbers of flats behind a door,
but the object isn't a door, it's a building

maybe osm.carto should avoid to render tagging mistake and target
only node and maybe only with entrance or door tag

Regards,
Marc

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

[OSM-talk-be] Renderen van addr:flats

[Sander Deryckere]

Hi,

In December last year, the default map rendering started to display the
addr:flats tag.
In Belgium, this looks rather ugly as these tags can be very long.

In some cases, it even becomes hard to see the housenumbers.

See some examples:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.87528/4.69102
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.04571/3.73000

I asked the OSM Carto project if they could revert that change, but they
say our tagging is an outlier and we should fix our tags.

To me, this sounds like tagging for the renderer, so I'm not very willing
to do that.

What are your opinions?

The issue can be found here:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4160

Kind regards,
Sander Deryckere
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be