Karl Newman wrote: >Sent: 29 July 2008 6:48 PM >To: Jochen Topf >Cc: talk >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] House numbers... One more suggestion > >On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 10:27 AM, Jochen Topf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 10:16:33AM -0700, Karl Newman wrote: > > To be clear, I don't have a problem with tagging the actual >location of the > > house or building. I think it's unnecessary, but the problem I have >with the > > scheme is that it doesn't definitively link the node with the way >(what's a > > house number without an associated street?) My suggestion (the >third on that > > > Thats why you should not only tag the building/node with the house > number, but with the full address. Yes, there is some duplication of > data, but its still easier than relations and doesn't break as easy. > > > Jochen > > > >I'm okay with data duplication. Could we do both, then--the Karlsruhe >schema where actual locations are tagged with full address, and a relation >to topologically link the house number with the closest node in the way?
I really don't think you should link to nodes in the way, they get moved around all the time. By all means link with a relation to the way but linking to nodes is asking for trouble. Cheers Andy _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
