On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Dave Hansen <d...@sr71.net> wrote: > There's nothing wrong with doing point-level address imports. The only > thing I would suggest is ensuring that we connect those points ways or > whatever to the roads that represent them somehow.
1) Why? 2) Are you planning on doing that with the TIGER address import? > One way to do that is relations. Relations could connect the points with "ways", but without a whole lot of work they're not going to be able to connect them with "roads", because a single road can consist of many different ways. Until some sort of relation is invented to connect multiple ways to a single road, the best way to connect a point with a road is by using the name of that road. Maybe you meant that you wanted to connect the points with ways, but if so it's unclear what connection you would want to make. The best candidate would be to connect the points with the way which is used to get to the point, but that has pretty much nothing to do with addresses - your address may be "X Street", but your driveway might be connected to "Y Street". Mapping driveways isn't a prerequisite for adding address information, and you wouldn't want to use a relation for that anyway, you'd want to use a way. > They ensure that you can't, for instance, delete the road > without also considering how deleting the road might affect addresses on > that stretch of road. It doesn't, and it shouldn't. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
