Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: The associatedStreet relation has the streetname in 'name', not in addr:street. I also found some relations where this was done incorrectly. It is possible to fix all of them in one go. Advise me if you want me to do so. Do you mean fix associatedStreet relations tagged with addr:street, or fix buildings tagged with addr:street who are also in an associatedStreet relation? If the latter, I would not do this automatically, as any tags that disagree probably need a human to check them. On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Ivo De Broeck ivo.debro...@gmail.com wrote: I don't agree with that. Its necessary to have addr:street for every address. When you use potlatch on the computer or iLOE on your smartphone its easy to bring in new data or correct the data. The associated street is redundant (and as i saw in Bierbeek often wrong). For me it is most important that new users have the possibility of introduce new data in a simple way (copy-paste the streetname in addr:street). Its a pity that most of the people here give only sophisticated solutions for very simple problems. Unfortunately, simple solutions often only solve some of the problems. associatedStreet is more complex than addr:street, but it makes clear precisely to which street a building belongs. Otherwise, if you need the street that belongs to that building, you have to search for the geographically closest way with the same name, a much slower, more time-consuming and not necessarily accurate operation. I don't object to either being used at this time, however. I add associatedStreet relations when there is *no* address information but I don't convert addr:street addresses to new relations. I do fix it, one way or the other, when I see them used simultaneously on the same building, because that is indeed redundant. Cheers, Jw ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
The remark I made was about the associatedStreet relation. The name of the street is put in the name tag, just like it is done on the ways forming the street. So all other tags are addr:country, addr:city, addr:postcode, but the streetname goes into name. Everyone is free to add addr:street to the house and POI objects as well. It's creating an unfortunate redundancy, but as you mention we seem to be needing that for editors like iLoe and Vespucci which don't support relations (yet). Why you need it on Potlatch eludes me, as that one does support relations, but since I don't have experience with it anymore, I should probably shut up about it. I do think associatedStreet relations still have a function to avoid duplicating/multiplicating the country, city and postcode information that make addresses complete and possibly to be able to perform quality control on the data. The redundancy can help to check whether the data is consistent. Personally I don't like repeating data over and over, as it makes it easier to make mistakes and when a streetname changes it becomes necessary to change it in many places. @Jan-Willem: I wouldn't take away the addr:street from the houses and POIs when you add them to an associatedStreet relation. I tried that once, a few years ago, and had to revert because portable editors didn't support relations (and they still don't) and, when in the field, people are missing that information then. So it's probably best to keep that redundancy in the data. Jo 2013/1/7 Ivo De Broeck ivo.debro...@gmail.com I don't agree with that. Its necessary to have addr:street for every address. When you use potlatch on the computer or iLOE on your smartphone its easy to bring in new data or correct the data. The associated street is redundant (and as i saw in Bierbeek often wrong). For me it is most important that new users have the possibility of introduce new data in a simple way (copy-paste the streetname in addr:street). Its a pity that most of the people here give only sophisticated solutions for very simple problems. If you don't make it easy for the contributors, you will never get addresses from then. 2013/1/7 Jo winfi...@gmail.com The associatedStreet relation has the streetname in 'name', not in addr:street. I also found some relations where this was done incorrectly. It is possible to fix all of them in one go. Advise me if you want me to do so. Polyglot 2013/1/7 Joren joren.libreoff...@telenet.be Op 07-01-13 00:35, Kurt Roeckx schreef: On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 03:23:15PM +0100, Sander Deryckere wrote: The first thing you notice is that there are a lot of features with housenumber information, but without street information. While other information (such as city) can be determined from closed boundaries. It's often ambiguous and hard to determine the street from other OSM features. Osmose counts alot of errors in Belgium because of that. See: http://osmose.openstreetmap.**fr/errors/graph.png?country=**belgiumhttp://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/errors/graph.png?country=belgium http://tools.geofabrik.de/**osmi/?view=addresseslon=4.** 41356lat=51.10370zoom=14**baselayer=Geofabrikopacity=1.** 00overlays=no_addr_street,**street_not_foundhttp://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresseslon=4.41356lat=51.10370zoom=14baselayer=Geofabrikopacity=1.00overlays=no_addr_street,street_not_found Geofabrik shows that there are many 'bugs' in the city 'Reet' ... but when I examine it, some/all houses are tagged with 'associatedStreet streetname, etc'... Is this the correct tagging, or do we need to delete that tag, and tag them with 'addr:street'? About 50% of those are because of missing addr:street or associatedStreet relation. It would in general be a good thing that we try and fix all those errors. Thanks in advance, Joren __**_ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-behttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: @Jan-Willem: I wouldn't take away the addr:street from the houses and POIs when you add them to an associatedStreet relation. I tried that once, a few years ago, and had to revert because portable editors didn't support relations (and they still don't) and, when in the field, people are missing that information then. So it's probably best to keep that redundancy in the data. I find that very dangerous, and would rather people added only addr:street tags than both. What if I incorrectly add an associatedStreet, and then a mobile mapper adds the correct addr:street tag - who should the end users then believe? Or if I add the correct relation, and a vandal a wrong addr:street tag? You know, seeing as the street already has the name, why is the name repeated in associatedStreet at all? - Jw ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
I've added most of those addresses in Reet. I use JOSM all the time to create associatedStreet relations. I vaguely remember seeing a different behavior at a certain point, where JOSM started adding addr:street tags to the buildings when its building tool creates an associatedStreet relation. Is this my imagination, or did anybody else noticed this as well ? m ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
This is what I would propose: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1919939/history addr:city, addr:postcode, addr:country, and maybe addr:state, although I'd prefer addr:province there go in the associatedStreet relation. The name of the street goes into name. This way it becomes usable in the list of relations. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/141730010/history addr:housenumber and addr:street are filled out on the buildings and POIs. The advantage is that this is workable with a minimal editor on a tablet or phone, while at the same time reducing tens of thousands of repetitions of city names and postcodes. This way the street name is available as name on the ways and the associatedStreet relations and as addr:street on the buildings and the POIs. The redundancy that is created this way allows to detect anomalies as described by Jan-Willem and get them corrected. A good example is the problem I just fixed, where a street name of a street in Leuven inadvertently got applied to the houses in Reet. Geofabrik's site spotted that. Jo ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
2013/1/7 Jan-willem De Bleser j...@thescrapyard.org On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Sander Deryckere sander...@gmail.com wrote: Who says that the closest street is in the associatedstreet relation. That relation has nothing to do with the closest street, only with the administrative division of houses into streets. Look at this relation: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1869108 Hang on, by closest street you mean closest way of a street mapped as multiple ways? It's my understanding that, when this is the case, a house is associated with the way on which it lies. That relation 1869108 is an example of incorrect mapping, as far as I can see. Addresses are associated with a particular stretch of street, aren't they? I've always taken associatedStreet as a relation trying to represent this mapping. Or would you maintain that this is true, but that the stretch of street belonging to an address bears no relation to where the plot of land belonging to that address is? At first the definition of associatedStreet was like you say, but this has been changed. It's too hard to keep it correct (when splitting ways for example). So all the ways forming a street with addresses in the same city, having the same postcode, together with all the houses go into the same associatedStreet relation. BTW, there is a great mapcss for JOSM called ColouredAddresses which give a great overview of what belongs together. Jo ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 08:17:11AM +0100, Jo wrote: The associatedStreet relation has the streetname in 'name', not in addr:street. I also found some relations where this was done incorrectly. It is possible to fix all of them in one go. Advise me if you want me to do so. As far as I understand it, there is no reason to give the relation a name other than being useful to find it. The street name itself should come from the member that is marked as street. It something displays the name of the relation as addr:street information, I think that's just wrong and should get fixed. Kurt ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Sander Deryckere sander...@gmail.com wrote: If it's administrative, it's not necessarily the closest. I have given an example of it, but there are multiple examples, like for this house: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/174076563, it's in gemeente Staden, but all streets around it are in gemeente Roeselare. So you can't add those streets to the associatedstreet relation if it's administrative. Unless all driveways should also be part of the relation. So, this house has the official address Groenestraat 42, Staden, but the driveway opens on Groenestraat, Roeselare? And the problem is that if you add it to the associatedStreet, the house will look like it's in Roeselare, right? That is tricky, but the problem is not the relation linking the street and the house, but that the relation is tagged as being in Roeselare. Or have I misunderstood your explanation? Or are you all really only interested in associatedStreet as a gathering point for the common information such as postcode and country? I thought so, as it's a general recommendation to not use relations where spatial queries can be 100% accurate. Administrative stuff can't be 100% accurate queried, closest street can. 'Closest street' is 100% accurate, but the street a house belongs to is not necessarily the closest one, especially if you were to consider a street that crosses a town boundary to be two separate streets. To take a similar problem, if you have a house that is divided in half by a postcode boundary, how do you determine in which postcode the house belongs? This is the kind of problem I had in mind when I said, in my first mail, that such a search was not necessarily accurate. I do see your point that you shouldn't tag what you can find in a 100% accurate search. Of course, that leads me to the question of Why do we add addr:city at all, assuming that every house is fully within a city's boundaries? ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
2013/1/7 Kurt Roeckx k...@roeckx.be On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 06:06:02PM +, Jan-willem De Bleser wrote: Of course, that leads me to the question of Why do we add addr:city at all, assuming that every house is fully within a city's boundaries? The only reason I can see that being useful is that border between 2 cities goes through the building. The reason why I want to add addr:city and addr:postcode via an associatedStreet relation is that not all data consumers have geographic databases at their disposal and Openstreetmap doesn't have an API (yet) that allows you to query what city an object is in. It is trivial though to ask what associatedStreet relation does an object belong to and get the complete address that way. Jo ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 03:23:15PM +0100, Sander Deryckere wrote: The first thing you notice is that there are a lot of features with housenumber information, but without street information. While other information (such as city) can be determined from closed boundaries. It's often ambiguous and hard to determine the street from other OSM features. Osmose counts alot of errors in Belgium because of that. See: http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/errors/graph.png?country=belgium About 50% of those are because of missing addr:street or associatedStreet relation. It would in general be a good thing that we try and fix all those errors. Kurt ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
The associatedStreet relation has the streetname in 'name', not in addr:street. I also found some relations where this was done incorrectly. It is possible to fix all of them in one go. Advise me if you want me to do so. Polyglot 2013/1/7 Joren joren.libreoff...@telenet.be Op 07-01-13 00:35, Kurt Roeckx schreef: On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 03:23:15PM +0100, Sander Deryckere wrote: The first thing you notice is that there are a lot of features with housenumber information, but without street information. While other information (such as city) can be determined from closed boundaries. It's often ambiguous and hard to determine the street from other OSM features. Osmose counts alot of errors in Belgium because of that. See: http://osmose.openstreetmap.**fr/errors/graph.png?country=**belgiumhttp://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/errors/graph.png?country=belgium http://tools.geofabrik.de/**osmi/?view=addresseslon=4.** 41356lat=51.10370zoom=14**baselayer=Geofabrikopacity=1.** 00overlays=no_addr_street,**street_not_foundhttp://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresseslon=4.41356lat=51.10370zoom=14baselayer=Geofabrikopacity=1.00overlays=no_addr_street,street_not_found Geofabrik shows that there are many 'bugs' in the city 'Reet' ... but when I examine it, some/all houses are tagged with 'associatedStreet streetname, etc'... Is this the correct tagging, or do we need to delete that tag, and tag them with 'addr:street'? About 50% of those are because of missing addr:street or associatedStreet relation. It would in general be a good thing that we try and fix all those errors. Thanks in advance, Joren __**_ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-behttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
Frederik Ramm developed a script that takes history into account: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/housenumbers.html It does a lot more credit to the work of Ivodeb around Korbeek-Lo and Bierbeek. The numbers are also for worldwide edits instead of only Belgium. Happy New Year (well almost), Jo ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
PS: I'm using a lot of geocoding when I truly mean 'reverse
geocode', I only focus in getting full addresses back from
coordinates.
That's probably the main difference. I focus on geocoding (getting
coordinates from an address). And when you have long streets without
housenumbers, Nominatim will give a result, but the result can easily
be 20 km off. Which is really unacceptable. As you don't know how
long the street is, you can only assume that you have the correct
place when the housenumber is found.
20 Km is unacceptable, but It's probably partly the fault of nominatim
code itself, I've been doing plenty of mods and the way it finds
(geocode) places is pretty complicated. I'm not saying incorrect but it
sure is huge (try forking it on github to find out). And it's based on
getting USA/GB address types in general. Which means, when we deviate a
bit from the 'current' de facto standard that nominatim uses, we get
less accurate results. That doesn't mean it's not in OSM data.
I've been playing a lot with the idea of creating a light-weight
geocoder api on top of Gazetteer. It also always intruiged me why I
was unable to get a postcode (but I did get a city) in a reverse geocode
on my own servers (at one point I installed enough gazetteers to know
the procedure by heart). But the public one did find postal codes. I
always used all their docs for my own installs. That triggered me to
patch the result set and include postal codes by name and distance
(coordinates as a source helps). Which turned problematic in
Brussels/Antwerp sometimes. But the customers didn't really care if it
was 1 code off.
So that's what I meant with the 1 in 40 statement.
In that sense, you are probably right. You need to know how to feed
keywords in the correct order in the search page. In google you can
pretty much slam anything in it whatever the order, but they probably
use a 1000 of their nodes at once to figure that out.
And I agree that the data is becoming better and better. When I
started, my own street wasn't on the map (this triggered me). Now the
street network is good as complete (we even have streets in the DB
that are still under construction). So we need to focus on other
things. Those things are (according to me):
I love to add those under constructions, I check the site of my
municipality frequently for their names etc. I love to remap places
that have recently been reconstructed, like the R6 in
Mechelen/Sint-Katelijne-Waver for example. It took a year for google to
catch up. That's how I push people into mapping or make customers aware
that their name is on that map because I put it there. They absolutely
love that stuff.
* Addresses including housenumbers
* POI's including extra information s.a. opening hours
* Extra info on roads (maxspeed, lanes ...)
agreed with all. The easiest way I find to add addresses/street info is;
- know the place
- put all merchants in it ('zelfstandigen', bakery, chinese food,
vending machines). Use their site or the municipality to find the
addresses, every place does that with the small shops. They won't mind
this at all, in fact, they love the exposure. And it's an official list
and you can use it, it is public information by nature.
- Just start with what you know. Try finding bread here in the area
at night, only for that reason I add all those vending machines so I can
follow the android in my quest for food ;-)
I just wanted to see how our addresses are evolving, as a result of
the other blog posts.and it wasn't that hard to get some indicative
numbers.
It's useful exercise, which I applaud. Only at the very end of my
initial reaction I started to realise the 'reverse geocoding' fact isn't
typical use for everyone ;-)
In that sense, there is a german oriented plugin to add maxspeed/road
signs to JOSM. It's a great tool and a way to put some standards in. It
has a way to customize, I did like 5% of it to map road signs. It
supports mapping it on a way and just signs next to the road( less
useful imho). 'road signs plugin' it's called. So I'm trying to make
a Belgian version, in the recent road signs discussion this could prove
useful for extra quality.
Mvg,
Glenn
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
On 23-dec.-2012, at 12:28, Sander Deryckere sander...@gmail.com wrote: Now the street network is good as complete (we even have streets in the DB that are still under construction). So we need to focus on other things. Those things are (according to me): Addresses including housenumbers POI's including extra information s.a. opening hours Extra info on roads (maxspeed, lanes ...) I've been lurking on this list for too long, but this message triggered me. A few years ago I added a few streets in my neighbourhood, but indeed now all the streets are in OSM, so more detailed info needs to be added. Problem is: I don't know how to do this in a decent way! And I'm very afraid to break something, or even worse do it in a bad way. There have been too many discussions on this list about bad conventions used by others to give me confidence to add these things. What would help me (and others I believe), is that there are simple tutorials to execute these things that clearly describe the conventions. For the housenumbers for example : is there an easy way to add these through my Android phone? Or how do you do this? Thanks, Chris ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
Hi Chris, The easiest way is to simply add addr:housenumber nodes. It's hard to do anything wrong with that. For good measure add addr:street as well. On Android you can use the latest version of Vespucci. It works quite well, but it's not a lot of use without an internet connection (3G or WLAN). One step further is to add addr:interpolation vectors. Add the numbers on the streetcorners and the special cases like 5A (also add 5 and 6 in that case) and a way in between. I prefer to add addr:housenumber in 'the field' and do 'postprocessing' afterwards. Drawing the buildings and adding them to associatedStreet relations, but the most important part are those addr:housenumber nodes. The rest can be done later, but that's the 'raw' data. Jo 2012/12/23 Chris Van Bael chris.van.b...@gmail.com On 23-dec.-2012, at 12:28, Sander Deryckere sander...@gmail.com wrote: Now the street network is good as complete (we even have streets in the DB that are still under construction). So we need to focus on other things. Those things are (according to me): - Addresses including housenumbers - POI's including extra information s.a. opening hours - Extra info on roads (maxspeed, lanes ...) I've been lurking on this list for too long, but this message triggered me. A few years ago I added a few streets in my neighbourhood, but indeed now all the streets are in OSM, so more detailed info needs to be added. Problem is: I don't know how to do this in a decent way! And I'm very afraid to break something, or even worse do it in a bad way. There have been too many discussions on this list about bad conventions used by others to give me confidence to add these things. What would help me (and others I believe), is that there are simple tutorials to execute these things that clearly describe the conventions. For the housenumbers for example : is there an easy way to add these through my Android phone? Or how do you do this? Thanks, Chris ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Addresses in Belgium
2012/12/22 Sander Deryckere sander...@gmail.com After the articles about the addresses in Germany (where every average German contributor should gather 1000 addresses), I wondered how we were doing in Belgium. So I downloaded the address information in Belgium and did some counting. I only counted the addr:housenumber and addr:street tags. I didn't occupy myself with the associatedstreet relations, as I've not that often seen those on their own. If you think I'm wrong, I can do my counting again. I also didn't take the addr:interpolation into account. Just because it's difficult to analyse it. The first thing you notice is that there are a lot of features with housenumber information, but without street information. While other information (such as city) can be determined from closed boundaries. It's often ambiguous and hard to determine the street from other OSM features. Some applications (s.a. Nominatim) implement the street guessing, sometimes with wrong results. Other apps (s.a. OsmAnd) just don't include houses without street information in their search, so that info is completely lost. Now, how many addresses would be missing. We can't assume Belgium has 11 million addresses, as many people live together. So I searched other data. The number of addresses in Belgium seems impossible to find, but I did find the number of families in Belgium: http://www.centrumvoorsociaalbeleid.be/indicatoren/index.php?q=node/176. I assume that the number of addresses must be about the same. There are addresses without families (like firms) and multiple families living in one apartment with one address (but often different post boxes). So that means we're needing about 4.5 million addresses and currently have 112 000. The completeness is thus about 2.5% of address data. Not a very good number. When searching 40 addresses, only 1 on average will be found in OSM. But it becomes better when we look how the data evolved. Of that 112 000 addresses, there are 76 000 created (or modified) in 2012 and 105 000 since 2011. That means that the number of addresses created is going up If we can keep a bit of growth, we could map the majority of addresses in a few years. So continue with the effort, and map as many addresses as possible. *How to map?* There's also a lot of armchair mapping that can be done. First of all, all that streetnames that need to be added. People are better in guessing the right streetname, and if there's doubt, just add a fixme tag. Next to that, if you see a restaurant on the map, without address data, just search the website of that restaurant and get the address data from there. You're doing nothing wrong, as long as you don't take the data from a database (such as the golden pages), you aren't violating any copyrights or database rights. While you're at the website of the restaurant, you can also add other information s.a. opening hours or phone number. Of course, when the weather is good, you can go out and map addresses. I normally use photo mapping because it's so fast (and if you see an other feature, you can also just take a picture of it), but there are also apps for that, s.a. the Keypadmapper app for Android. I was curious about some actual statistics, so I used Sander's Overpass query (somewhat modified to include asscociatedStreet relations): area[name=België - Belgique - Belgien]; ( node(area); ; ) - .allnodeswaysrelationsinBelgium; ( rel.allnodeswaysrelationsinBelgium[type=associatedStreet]; ) - .allassociatedStreetrelations; ( rel.allnodeswaysrelationsinBelgium[addr:housenumber]; ) - .alladdr_housenumberrelations; ( way.allnodeswaysrelationsinBelgium[addr:housenumber]; ) - .alladdr_housenumberways; ( node.allnodeswaysrelationsinBelgium[addr:housenumber]; ) - .alladdr_housenumbernodes; ( .allassociatedStreetrelations; .allassociatedStreetrelations ; .alladdr_housenumberrelations; .alladdr_housenumberrelations ; .alladdr_housenumberways; .alladdr_housenumberways ; .alladdr_housenumbernodes; ); out meta qt; Then some Python magic with SAX to extract the users from the xml: import xml.sax ''' sample data: node id=1248089374 lat=51.2509015 lon=5.5448618 version=1 timestamp=2011-04-17T09:51:55Z changeset=7884790 uid=9176 user=Maarten Deen tag k=addr:city v=Hamont/ tag k=addr:country v=BE/ tag k=addr:housenumber v=32/ tag k=addr:postcode v=3930/ tag k=addr:street v=Stad/ tag k=amenity v=bank/ tag k=atm v=yes/ tag k=name v=BNP Paribas Fortis/ /node way id=165086472 version=1 timestamp=2012-05-26T21:27:01Z changeset=11710662 uid=436365 user=escada nd ref=1766686928/ nd ref=1766686927/ nd ref=1766686912/ nd ref=1766686914/ nd ref=1766686928/ tag k=addr:housenumber v=1/ tag k=addr:street v=Route de l'Arboretum/ tag k=building v=yes/ tag k=source v=bing2012/ /way ''' class
