On 10 August 2018 at 21:06, Blake Girardot HOT/OSM <blake.girar...@hotosm.org> wrote: > Hi Frederick, > > I appreciate the thoughtful reply. > > I think for the most part we all agree on the technology solution > really looking like the best option. But it is the best option in the > medium and long term. > > In the short term, putting a few thousand plus-codes in as addresses, > while the local community tries them out. Who know if they work for > local folks, but just jamming a few thousand in will allow all the > stake holders to trial these codes. Print maps, put signs on > buildings, communicate with each other using them.
But exactly *how* does adding the OLC as a tag to the object in OSM help them do that? Why do they need them as tags to do any of printing maps, putting signs on buildings or communicating with others using them? What actual process, manual or programmatic, are you imagining here? The only way to make use of OSM is to write software which processes the database (creating geocoders, rendering maps etc). That software could *so* easily inject OLCs in whatever way you want. The only possible reason to have OLCs as a tag is if people are reading the raw XML OSM data as text printed on paper and want to find out what OLC a certain way has. No one does that. To make any meaningful use of these tags they will have to write software designed to extract the OLCs and interpret them at which point they could simply *generate* the tags at point-of-use (they are effectively just an encoded lat/lon). This avoids any onerous manual tagging and makes anything they create immediately useful as widely as they wish. I agree with others in this discussion that it's bizarre that anyone thinks that adding these codes as tags to all the buildings in a city is a sensible thing to do or a good use of anyone's time. Matt _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
