According to https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/addr:neighbourhood#map it is almost only used in Japan and Turkey, which do have specific own addressing systems. Same taginfo shows that Id supports it in general, but I would not take it into brand new use here.
To the original question. I now downloaded full ADS database and checked samples and it seems that TASE6 is used in rural places for farm names, and if farm has several buildings (e.g. barn) then it can have additional house numbers in TASE7. So no problem to use addr:housename + addr:housenumber combination. Jaak > On 25 Sep 2019, at 16:33, SviMik via Talk-ee <talk-ee@openstreetmap.org> > wrote: > > addr:neighbourhood seems like some barely proposed feature. I can't find > anything decent on the wiki abot this tag. Even worse, there's no even > proposal page. Is it really supported by any software? Can you give me some > description for this tag? > > > Среда, 25 сентября 2019, 15:30 +03:00 от "Vitali Balandin" <v...@hot.ee > <mailto:v...@hot.ee>>: >> >> Depends on the situation, most often this is former gardening. In that case, >> I >> would suggest taking advantage addr:neighbourhood >> >> вт, 24 сент. 2019 г. в 23:47, < talk-ee-requ...@openstreetmap.org >: >>> Send Talk-ee mailing list submissions to >>> talk-ee@openstreetmap.org >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> talk-ee-requ...@openstreetmap.org >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> talk-ee-ow...@openstreetmap.org >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of Talk-ee digest..." >>> >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. Maa-amet Tase 6 (maaüksuse nimi) – addr:place või >>> addr:housename? (SviMik) >>> 2. Re: Maa-amet Tase 6 (maaüksuse nimi) – addr:place või >>> addr:housename? (Jaak Laineste) >>> 3. Re: verbatium buiding import discussion (Jaak Laineste) >>> 4. Re: verbatium buiding import discussion (SviMik) >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 17:51:48 +0300 >>> From: SviMik < svi...@mail.ru > >>> To: talk-ee@openstreetmap.org >>> Subject: [Talk-ee] Maa-amet Tase 6 (maaüksuse nimi) – addr:place >>> või addr:housename? >>> Message-ID: < 1569336708.131737...@f515.i.mail.ru > >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I have a tagging puzzle here. Maa-amet classifies address parts in the >> following way: >>> >>> Tase 3 – asustusüksus ja linnaosa >>> Tase 4 – väikekoht >>> Tase 5 – liikluspind (tänav) >>> Tase 6 – maaüksuse nimi >>> Tase 7 – aadressi number >>> >>> The problem is, that many buildings in Estonia do not have Tase 5 (street >> name), but instead have Tase 6 (lot name) and may or may not have Tase 7 >> (housenumber) at the same time. >>> >>> According to OSM wiki, addr:place is "part of an address which refers to the >> name of some territorial zone". >>> Looks perfect so far, "the name of some territorial zone" is literally >> "maaüksuse nimi". >>> But... >>> 1. addr:place requires place=* node or area to be mapped too, which is not >> really doable for every land lot. >>> 2. I'm already using addr:place for Tase 4 (väikekoht, aiandusühistu, etc) >> which fits better for this role. >>> >>> We could use addr:housename for this instead. >>> Indeed, Tase 6 is often used as a replacement for the street+number scheme, >> and in most cases is literally the property name. >>> But... >>> 1. Sometimes Tase 6 comes with Tase 7 (housenumber). I'm not sure if >> addr:housename can be used together with addr:housenumber, the addr:housename >> sounds like it must be the final address part. >>> >>> Examples with house number: >>> >>> Harju maakond;Kuusalu vald;Leesi küla;Kasemäe;1 >>> Harju maakond;Kuusalu vald;Leesi küla;Kasemäe;2 >>> - here Kasemäe is tase6, not street (tase5), but it still uses house >> numbering. This example looks like addr:place. >>> >>> Lääne-Viru maakond;Kadrina vald;Arbavere küla;Palkoja baas >>> Harju maakond;Kuusalu vald;Vihasoo küla;Pumbamaja >>> Harju maakond;Anija vald;Härmakosu küla;Härmakosu tehnopark >>> - here the last part is tase6 too. They don't have house numbers, and these >> examles do look like addr:housename. >>> >>> So, the questions is: where exactly do I put the Maa-amet "Tase 6" address >> part in OSM tagging scheme? >>> And is it OK to use addr:housename together with addr:housenumber? >>> >>> -- >>> SviMik >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 18:16:23 +0300 >>> From: Jaak Laineste < j...@nutiteq.com > >>> To: SviMik < svi...@mail.ru >, OpenStreetMap Estonia >>> < talk-ee@openstreetmap.org > >>> Subject: Re: [Talk-ee] Maa-amet Tase 6 (maaüksuse nimi) – >>> addr:place või addr:housename? >>> Message-ID: < f5934565-8e26-47a9-ab02-1c4a36384...@nutiteq.com > >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >>> >>> >>> There is a wiki page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Et:Key:addr ., I >> think it is basically tase 5: housename, tase 6: housenumber if I get the >> question right. >>> >>> Feel free to enhance the wiki page, not everyone reads talk-ee, but wiki is >> more official doc :) >>> >>> >>> Jaak >>> >>> >>>> On 24 Sep 2019, at 17:51, SviMik via Talk-ee < talk-ee@openstreetmap.org > >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I have a tagging puzzle here. Maa-amet classifies address parts in the >> following way: >>>> >>>> Tase 3 – asustusüksus ja linnaosa >>>> Tase 4 – väikekoht >>>> Tase 5 – liikluspind (tänav) >>>> Tase 6 – maaüksuse nimi >>>> Tase 7 – aadressi number >>>> >>>> The problem is, that many buildings in Estonia do not have Tase 5 (street >> name), but instead have Tase 6 (lot name) and may or may not have Tase 7 >> (housenumber) at the same time. >>>> >>>> According to OSM wiki, addr:place is "part of an address which refers to >> the name of some territorial zone". >>>> Looks perfect so far, "the name of some territorial zone" is literally >> "maaüksuse nimi". >>>> But... >>>> 1. addr:place requires place=* node or area to be mapped too, which is not >> really doable for every land lot. >>>> 2. I'm already using addr:place for Tase 4 (väikekoht, aiandusühistu, etc) >> which fits better for this role. >>>> >>>> We could use addr:housename for this instead. >>>> Indeed, Tase 6 is often used as a replacement for the street+number scheme, >> and in most cases is literally the property name. >>>> But... >>>> 1. Sometimes Tase 6 comes with Tase 7 (housenumber). I'm not sure if >> addr:housename can be used together with addr:housenumber, the addr:housename >> sounds like it must be the final address part. >>>> >>>> Examples with house number: >>>> >>>> Harju maakond;Kuusalu vald;Leesi küla;Kasemäe;1 >>>> Harju maakond;Kuusalu vald;Leesi küla;Kasemäe;2 >>>> - here Kasemäe is tase6, not street (tase5), but it still uses house >> numbering. This example looks like addr:place. >>>> >>>> Lääne-Viru maakond;Kadrina vald;Arbavere küla;Palkoja baas >>>> Harju maakond;Kuusalu vald;Vihasoo küla;Pumbamaja >>>> Harju maakond;Anija vald;Härmakosu küla;Härmakosu tehnopark >>>> - here the last part is tase6 too. They don't have house numbers, and these >> examles do look like addr:housename. >>>> >>>> So, the questions is: where exactly do I put the Maa-amet "Tase 6" address >> part in OSM tagging scheme? >>>> And is it OK to use addr:housename together with addr:housenumber? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> SviMik >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Talk-ee mailing list >>>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 3 >>> Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 22:08:08 +0300 >>> From: Jaak Laineste < j...@nutiteq.com > >>> To: SviMik < svi...@mail.ru > >>> Cc: OpenStreetMap Estonia < talk-ee@openstreetmap.org > >>> Subject: Re: [Talk-ee] verbatium buiding import discussion >>> Message-ID: < d349d740-71f0-4f2c-b2eb-1af6c2ca4...@nutiteq.com > >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >>> >>> >>> These txt reports with IDs are not too visual, can you create any renderable >> file for josm (.osm for example) or screenshot to show the community what it >> really means? Are the building under question random or somehow in specific >> areas etc. I dont know if there is any "test osm server” for such >> experiments >> nowadays somewhere, probably not. >>> >>> Jaak >>> >>>> On 24 Sep 2019, at 07:50, SviMik < svi...@mail.ru > wrote: >>>> >>>> I have analyzed the largest verbatium's import (changesets 591093, 579407, >> 572107, 569277, 569055 (ways) + 561094, 559707, 558636, 558056, 557568, >> 557358, 557193, 556899 (nodes only)), which was made in 2008. That covers >> 86.7% of all his edits. >>>> The import was covering Tallinn, Saue and Maardu. Turned out verbatium >> wasn't particulary active outside Harjumaa. >>>> There were total 67813 ways imported, 9032 of them are already deleted by >> other editors, and 17878 were changed either in geometry or tags* department >> (15529 has a geometry change, and 5077 has a tag change), which leaves 40903 >> buildings for deletion. >>>> * I did not count the following tags because they are part of my imports >> anyway: addr:city, addr:country, addr:housenumber, addr:street, maaamet:ETAK, >> maaamet:orig_tunnus, source, source:addr, addr2:* >>>> * If some change was reverted I do not count it as a change, because I only >> compare the first and the last version >>>> >>>> Here is the list of ways for deletion: >>>> http://svimik.com/verbatium_import1_ways_unchanged1.txt >>>> >>>> Here is the full report for all the 67813 ways: >>>> http://svimik.com/verbatium_import1_ways1.csv >>>> >>>> Full list of his changesets: >>>> http://svimik.com/verbatium_changesets.xls >>>> >>>> Currently, the bbox of his changesets has 91324 buildings, which means... >> We're gonna delete 44.79% of Saue-Tallinn-Maardu buildings. That gonna be >> interesting. Should we split it by 10k for example? Or just start with Maardu >> and see what happens? >>>> >>>> >>>> Воскресенье, 15 сентября 2019, 9:42 +03:00 от "Jaak Laineste" < >> j...@nutiteq.com >: >>>>> Hoi, >>>>> >>>>> Jah, need peaks kustutama. Enne võiks teha muudatuse analüüsi - kui palju >> ja >>>>> kus kustutataks, ega mõned linnad kohe väga tühjaks ei jää. >>>>> >>>>> Jaak >>>>> >>>>> p.s. sama asi ka corine impordi osade tag-idega, näiteks põllud (field), >> need >>>>> on pigem müra kui info kaardil. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 14 Sep 2019, at 15:34, SviMik via Talk-ee < talk-ee@openstreetmap.org >>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi everyone! >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd like to discuss the import made by verbatium in 2008: >>>>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/569055 >>>>>> (...and other similar changesets) >>>>>> >>>>>> There are two issues with that import: >>>>>> 1. Unknown data source with unknown license (probably it was a Garmin map >>>>> judging by the Type=0x13 tag) >>>>>> 2. Poor quality of the data. If you see a building distorted like this: >>>>> http://svimik.com/verbatiumimport1.png >>>>>> - you can be sure it's verbatium's. Maybe it was OK in 2008, but in 2019 >> we >>>>> have much better options. >>>>>> >>>>>> What can be done: >>>>>> 1. Remove all buildings which geometry and tags were not edited since the >>>>> initial import. For the tags the following exceptions can be made because >> they >>>>> were automatic edits: >>>>>> - User xybot has fixed the tag typo (buildung=yes) in the initial import >> and >>>>> added its own tag (created_by=xybot) >>>>>> - User juhanjuku has removed the Type=0x13 and created_by=xybot tags >>>>>> - User SviMik_import has imported the address tags to these buildings >> from >>>>> the Maa-amet database (nothing that can't be imported again) >>>>>> 2. Proceed with the Maa-amet building import as usual >>>>>> >>>>>> It will solve: >>>>>> 1. The license issue (if there is any) >>>>>> 2. The quality issue (if you agree there is an issue) >>>>>> 3. Will update the map in general, for example the demolished buildings >> will >>>>> be removed from OSM. >>>>>> >>>>>> For buildings which geometry was changed by other contributors after the >>>>> initial import - we can assume both license and quality issues were solved >>>>> since they no longer contain the imported geometry. I know it's a grey >> field, >>>>> and I'm not sure it works like that, but at least these buildings do have >> some >>>>> excuse to stay. >>>>>> >>>>>> For buildings which geometry was NOT changed, but some POI tags were >> added - >>>>> let them stay for now and discuss it later if needed. I suspect it will be >> a >>>>> rare case, but the exact number is unknown right now. >>>>>> >>>>>> Questions: >>>>>> 1. Has anyone else digged into the issue, maybe asked verbatium himself? >>>>>> 2. Can anyone confirm that the import indeed has the license problem? >>>>>> 3. Is the proposed plan good? (in case if you agree that it needs to be >>>>> fixed) >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> SviMik >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Talk-ee mailing list >>>>>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org >>>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Svjatoslav Mikhailov >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 4 >>> Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 23:46:36 +0300 >>> From: SviMik < svi...@mail.ru > >>> To: Jaak Laineste < j...@nutiteq.com > >>> Cc: OpenStreetMap Estonia < talk-ee@openstreetmap.org > >>> Subject: Re: [Talk-ee] verbatium buiding import discussion >>> Message-ID: < 1569357996.361134...@f466.i.mail.ru > >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >>> >>> http://svimik.com/verbatiumimportmap1.png >>> Here's the screenshot. Not precise, but gives some idea. >>> 40903 buildings is a bit too much for JOSM. >>> >>> >>> Вторник, 24 сентября 2019, 22:08 +03:00 от "Jaak Laineste" < >>> j...@nutiteq.com >>> : >>>> >>>> These txt reports with IDs are not too visual, can you create any >> renderable >>>> file for josm (.osm for example) or screenshot to show the community what >> it >>>> really means? Are the building under question random or somehow in specific >>>> areas etc. I dont know if there is any "test osm server” for such >> experiments >>>> nowadays somewhere, probably not. >>>> >>>> Jaak >>>> >>>>> On 24 Sep 2019, at 07:50, SviMik < svi...@mail.ru > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I have analyzed the largest verbatium's import (changesets 591093, >> 579407, >>>> 572107, 569277, 569055 (ways) + 561094, 559707, 558636, 558056, 557568, >>>> 557358, 557193, 556899 (nodes only)), which was made in 2008. That covers >>>> 86.7% of all his edits. >>>>> The import was covering Tallinn, Saue and Maardu. Turned out verbatium >>>> wasn't particulary active outside Harjumaa. >>>>> There were total 67813 ways imported, 9032 of them are already deleted by >>>> other editors, and 17878 were changed either in geometry or tags* >> department >>>> (15529 has a geometry change, and 5077 has a tag change), which leaves >> 40903 >>>> buildings for deletion. >>>>> * I did not count the following tags because they are part of my imports >>>> anyway: addr:city, addr:country, addr:housenumber, addr:street, >> maaamet:ETAK, >>>> maaamet:orig_tunnus, source, source:addr, addr2:* >>>>> * If some change was reverted I do not count it as a change, because I >> only >>>> compare the first and the last version >>>>> >>>>> Here is the list of ways for deletion: >>>>> http://svimik.com/verbatium_import1_ways_unchanged1.txt >>>>> >>>>> Here is the full report for all the 67813 ways: >>>>> http://svimik.com/verbatium_import1_ways1.csv >>>>> >>>>> Full list of his changesets: >>>>> http://svimik.com/verbatium_changesets.xls >>>>> >>>>> Currently, the bbox of his changesets has 91324 buildings, which means... >>>> We're gonna delete 44.79% of Saue-Tallinn-Maardu buildings. That gonna be >>>> interesting. Should we split it by 10k for example? Or just start with >> Maardu >>>> and see what happens? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Воскресенье, 15 сентября 2019, 9:42 +03:00 от "Jaak Laineste" >>>> < j...@nutiteq.com >: >>>>>> Hoi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Jah, need peaks kustutama. Enne võiks teha muudatuse analüüsi - kui >> palju >>>> ja >>>>>> kus kustutataks, ega mõned linnad kohe väga tühjaks ei jää. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jaak >>>>>> >>>>>> p.s. sama asi ka corine impordi osade tag-idega, näiteks põllud (field), >>>> need >>>>>> on pigem müra kui info kaardil. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 Sep 2019, at 15:34, SviMik via Talk-ee < >> talk-ee@openstreetmap.org > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi everyone! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd like to discuss the import made by verbatium in 2008: >>>>>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/569055 >>>>>>> (...and other similar changesets) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are two issues with that import: >>>>>>> 1. Unknown data source with unknown license (probably it was a Garmin >> map >>>>>> judging by the Type=0x13 tag) >>>>>>> 2. Poor quality of the data. If you see a building distorted like this: >>>>>> http://svimik.com/verbatiumimport1.png >>>>>>> - you can be sure it's verbatium's. Maybe it was OK in 2008, but in >> 2019 >>>> we >>>>>> have much better options. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What can be done: >>>>>>> 1. Remove all buildings which geometry and tags were not edited since >> the >>>>>> initial import. For the tags the following exceptions can be made >> because >>>> they >>>>>> were automatic edits: >>>>>>> - User xybot has fixed the tag typo (buildung=yes) in the initial >> import >>>> and >>>>>> added its own tag (created_by=xybot) >>>>>>> - User juhanjuku has removed the Type=0x13 and created_by=xybot tags >>>>>>> - User SviMik_import has imported the address tags to these buildings >> from >>>>>> the Maa-amet database (nothing that can't be imported again) >>>>>>> 2. Proceed with the Maa-amet building import as usual >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It will solve: >>>>>>> 1. The license issue (if there is any) >>>>>>> 2. The quality issue (if you agree there is an issue) >>>>>>> 3. Will update the map in general, for example the demolished buildings >>>> will >>>>>> be removed from OSM. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For buildings which geometry was changed by other contributors after >> the >>>>>> initial import - we can assume both license and quality issues were >> solved >>>>>> since they no longer contain the imported geometry. I know it's a grey >>>> field, >>>>>> and I'm not sure it works like that, but at least these buildings do >> have >>>> some >>>>>> excuse to stay. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For buildings which geometry was NOT changed, but some POI tags were >> added >>>> - >>>>>> let them stay for now and discuss it later if needed. I suspect it will >> be >>>> a >>>>>> rare case, but the exact number is unknown right now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Questions: >>>>>>> 1. Has anyone else digged into the issue, maybe asked verbatium >> himself? >>>>>>> 2. Can anyone confirm that the import indeed has the license problem? >>>>>>> 3. Is the proposed plan good? (in case if you agree that it needs to be >>>>>> fixed) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> SviMik >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Talk-ee mailing list >>>>>>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org >>>>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Subject: Digest Footer >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Talk-ee mailing list >>> Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> End of Talk-ee Digest, Vol 95, Issue 7 >>> ************************************** >> > > > -- > Svjatoslav Mikhailov > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ee mailing list > Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee > <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee>
_______________________________________________ Talk-ee mailing list Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee
