I agree that addresses is a complicated field. There are different historical systems, there are cities where even many streets are without names, etc. There is a lot of space for innovation, certainly.
What I meant is that it is not obligatory to map a city or a town addressable from one end to another, one house after another, or wait until a municipal government releases into public domain its database of addresses (which may be not without errors or omissions too). If there are, say, 10% of buildings where 90% of the population lives, studies and works, it makes sense to map them addressable first. Often these are large modern buildings with clear addresses. And it is much easier to return into the same area for the second time, when there are already at least some large buildings with numbers, much easier to orientate oneself. I see from your example that in the city of Reykjavik almost every building has a number, so you have a more advanced set of priorities. Best regards, Oleksiy On 23.10.2014 10:39, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: > I like addresses but they don't behave like you would think. For > example we have a part of a street that has each individual flat as > its own address number. We first used the number;number;number; > approach but I'm now in favor of naming the house what it says on the > front (the range 37-51) and then put address nodes on the building so > it appears in search, with roughly the position accounting for where > in the house the apartment is. In this case the numbers closest to the > street are at the bottom floor (the stadium approach I favor). I'm in > favor of moving this same method over to the other houses. > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/64.13635/-21.79883 > > As for being able to search within a specific town or area then I > think we should look again at relations and super-relations. You could > group streets relations into a neighborhood relation and then into a > town or municipality relation etc. This of course works very > differently based on country but for Iceland I can't see us hitting > any limits. > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Super-Relation > > Regards on behalf of the Icelandic Local Chapter applicant, > Jói > > Þann 22.10.2014 18:28, skrifaði Clifford Snow: >> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:04 AM, Oleksiy >> Muzalyev <oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch >> <mailto:oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch>> wrote: >> >> It is not necessary to put down a number on each building. It is >> possible to use /addr:interpolation/ (/odd, even/, or /all/). >> >> We put down a number on the first building, then on the last, >> connect them in JOSM, and add /addr:interpolation: all /. For >> example here: http://osm.org/go/0CFn0AZ_d--?m= . It is also very >> useful on a street with many small houses. And it is searchable. >> For example if there is number 15 and number 27 on the map for a >> street, and they are connected with /addr:interpolation: >> odd, /and/ /if one searches number 21, the map will show the >> number 21 all right. >> >> Then, there is another approach. We first map addressable large >> building, where a lot of people live or work. Kind of of going >> after the low-hanging fruit. >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
