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
solve the problem, having 3 units is not different from having 3 offices.
On 26.10.2017 17:01, Marc Zoutendijk wrote:
> Recently I discovered a tagging where at the same street address and house
number, 3 different
> (although related) companies are located.
The OSM rule is clear - "One feature, one OSM element". Thus 3 offices, 3 nodes.
> the office tag is not rendered at all on the standard map ...showing 3 times the same address
node on the map
That does not matter. If they render the housenumber 3 times, file a ticket in carto. Rendering
office values is being discussed there already.
> Which by definition is wrong because a given street address _must be
> unique_ - at least in the country (The Netherlands) where I live and where I
found this situation.
First you would need to check the exact wording of this definition (do you have a source?), probably
it says that the address per house must be unique. It unlikely says that there cannot be multiple
entities in this house.
The OSM address tagging is a closer description of the entity, in this case the offices, which are
all in the same house, thus have the same address.
> E.g. it is not uncommon to have a hotel and a bar share the same building
> and address. In this case the hotel is added to the (existing) address node
and a new node is
> created for the bar,
This is fine as the hotel is the major feature and the bar is subordinated.
> but without the address information and this node is simply put within the contour of the hotel
building.
This is fine, and it does not hurt to have the address on the bar as well.
> name=“name of first office”;”name of second office”;”name of third office”
Aaargh, no, please. One feature, one OSM element
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/associatedAddress
Isn't that a dead horse?
On 26.10.2017 23:12, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> Honest question, what is lost or wrong with having the address appear on
multiple objects?
Honest answer - nothing wrong, fine for me. One feature, one OSM element.
On 26.10.2017 23:49, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> How do you work addresses / POIs when you have someone work from home? EG it is a normal
residential building, in a residential suburb, but the front room is also an "accountant's" office
way: building=residential as this is the major feature
node within the building: office=* since this is subordinated (if that is a real office, e.g.
receiving visitors, not just a private room to work in)
tom
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
