On 12 Nov 2009, at 11:18 , Anthony wrote: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Apollinaris Schoell > <ascho...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: >>> It probably has to be a relation. Include a start node, an end >>> node, >>> and a list of one or more ways (which are connected to form one >>> logical way). >>> >> the ways have to be split at the start/end node. > > Not if you use a relation.
then I don't understand how this relation will work. and doubt most mappers will. if a way is not split at start end node there will be multiple address relations containing the same way. software will need to do analysis where the address range starts and stops. this is going to create a mess no one can edit and use >> the relation members have to be ordered. > > No they don't. that's interesting, what if multiple ways are part of an address range? this will require connectivity and topology analysis of all members. and this will fail if all way members are part of a loop. defining start/ end node will not help to decide which part it applies to. back to splitting the ways at start end nodes. > >> how is that easier than the Karlsruhe scheme? > > It's not really easier so much as more correct. why more correct? is a relation more correct than a extra way? Don't think so. the address is an attribute of the house not an attribute of the street. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
