On 2017-10-27 08:07, José G Moya Y. wrote:
> But from the outside tou can't see if the office is in "Gran Via 1 shop 2" or
> "Gran Via 1 shop 3", despite of the shop number being displayed in the
> mailbox.
The fact that you can't see it from the outside doesn't make it untrue.
Maybe it is veri
But from the outside tou can't see if the office is in "Gran Via 1 shop 2"
or "Gran Via 1 shop 3", despite of the shop number being displayed in the
mailbox.
El 27/10/2017 8:03, "Colin Smale" escribió:
> Time for a more philosophical discussion... What is the function of this
> thing we call "ad
Time for a more philosophical discussion... What is the function of this
thing we call "address"? Is it to identify a premises? Is it to describe
a premises? Does it refer to the whole premises, or just the bit with
the front door or letter box? Or is it "where to deliver post"?
Here in NL buildi
Two problems:
1. Site relations are for grouping features that can't be represented as
an area.
2. The KISS principle.
On 27/10/17 13:01, Warin wrote:
1 address on a site relation that contains these features - including
the building?
On 27-Oct-17 12:31 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
On 27/1
1 address on a site relation that contains these features - including
the building?
On 27-Oct-17 12:31 PM, Andrew Davidson wrote:
On 27/10/17 11:20, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
The OSM rule is clear - "One feature, one OSM element". Thus 3
offices, 3 nodes.
So 1 address 1 node (or 1 polygon if you
On 27/10/17 11:20, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
The OSM rule is clear - "One feature, one OSM element". Thus 3 offices,
3 nodes.
So 1 address 1 node (or 1 polygon if you know the spatial extent)?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lis
On 26.10.2017 23:49, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
Would an easy solution be to just call them Unit 1, Unit 2 & Unit 3, even though the actual offices
may not be physically designated that way?
Absolutely not. Please do not invent identifiers that do not exist in reality. Further, it would not
sol
> resulted in showing 3 times the same address node on the map. Which by
>> definition is wrong because a given street address (addr:city + addr:street
>> + addr:postcode + addr:housenumber) _must be unique_ - at least in the
>> country (The Netherlands) where I live and where I found this situati
> Which by definition is wrong because a given street address (addr:city +
addr:street + addr:postcode + addr:housenumber) _must be unique_ - at least
in the country (The Netherlands) where I live and where I found this
situation.
Honest question, what is lost or wrong with having the address appe
Hello,
Le 26. 10. 17 à 17:01, Marc Zoutendijk a écrit :
> Recently I discovered a tagging where at the same street address and
> house number, 3 different (although related) companies are located.
The solution that advocates the proposal you mentioned is to put the
address on the building and p
Hi all,
Recently I discovered a tagging where at the same street address and house
number, 3 different (although related) companies are located.
Because adding multiple values to the same key is not easy to do in OSM,
(mostly used for adding more telephone numbers, separating the numbers with
No, I didn't concact them individually yet. Moritz, can you do it?\
Will do.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
12 matches
Mail list logo
