2008/8/27 Karl Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > What? Of course it has relevance. The number means nothing without the > street. Houses don't have GUIDs. It has to be associated with it's street if > you ever want to look it up by address.
i'm not sure what a guid is, i assume it's 'globally unique identification'? in which case, yes they do - it's the property deed number. and it may sound pedantic, but we should really talk about the *property address*, not the *house address* - the first includes driveway, paths, car parks, garden, etc, etc. and maybe does not have a building there at all; the second makes all sorts of assumptions which will only be true in a small number of addresses this is going to be very relevant in the near future - land information new zealand are more than likely going to give us permission to include their property info database (the entire country, probably around a million ways defining property boundaries) in osm, so we're going to need a tagging scheme that accounts for it, and ties together the deed number and the street address >> numbers being part of a street but in reality they aren't, they are >> references for buildings. The second reason is that if we were to add >> nodes >> for every house on both sides of the street to every way we would soon >> find >> out ways totally unmanageable. As a further reason, houses are normally >> connected to the street with a driveway/footpath. In a fully featured map >> you would draw these in eventually. Its these that make the true >> relationship between building and street. spot on. > There's no need to add house numbers at every node in a way (except for > weird cases where the house numbers are not sequential). Put the numbers at > intervals and let interpolation take care of the rest. >> >> Always try top keep things simple. Keep like with like and don't try to >> over >> engineer the result and generally the result will be more than sufficient. > > The Karlsruhe schema is an example of what you get without any engineering > at all--just look how many different scenarios are presented on that page! > The common method used by other systems which store house numbers (for > example, TIGER) is to associate a house number with the way and indicate if > it's on the left or right. This is done only at certain points, and linear > interpolation takes care of the rest. This is also what's expected by > existing navigational systems (e.g., Garmin GPS) and if we ever hope to be > able to use our house number data there, it needs to be able to be > transformed into that format. The Karlsruhe schema does not allow for that > without a huge amount of work and a lot of uncertainty about the result. > > I'm not opposed to putting the house number on a separate node, but it needs > to be topologically connected with the way using a relation in that case, > because in real life, the house address *is* associated with the street it's > on _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk