OpenStreetMap
Intro
Hi all! My goal is to present something like reincarnation of old proposal named “associatedAddress”. But it will be mix of several ways to tagging address information: using address-nodes and building polygons/POI-nodes joined by relation. Frankly speaking this idea was independent, I didn’t know about existing associatedAddress proposal but used exactly this name. # Rationale All existing schemes are not solve two problems in complex:
- Buildings and (especially) POI-nodes with multiple house numbers.
- Multiple buildings and POI-nodes for one housenumber.
“associatedStreet” can be used in simple cases when we have only one addr:street/addr:housenumber tag. Also “geometric including” method could interpolate address information from polygons (multipolygons) to POI-nodes.
addr:housenumber2+addr:street2 or addr2:housenumber+addr2:street and so on schemes are not supported by renders, searching engines, data converters and other softs.
I propose to create simple relation named associatedAddress with following members and roles:
-
polygon (multipolygon) or/and POI-nodes (role=object)
-
address-nodes (with addr* tags) (role=address)
So we have no problems I told before. But is necessary some modification of software to full support this scheme (primarily searching engines and converters). And there is not needed multiple duplicates of address tags. # For clear understanding I prepared those practical examples: * This one
Note: there can be any number of members (role=address or role=object)
How it looks in JOSM:
Thanks for attention and pardon my French :)
Discussion
Comment from SimonPoole on 27 February 2016 at 07:47
While most OSM contributors will agree with you that the two cases you list turn up often enough that they need a solution, the solutions are already here and have been in use for a long time:
multiple addresses in one building: multiple address nodes, or if known addresses on the entrances nodes
large site with multiple buildings: site relations.
The former doesn’t need any special support, the later is currently not rendered in the standard style (there are some technical hurdles before that happens). But as always there in OSM there is always an interaction between use of a specific mapping scheme and its support in the tools, simply use it more and it will get more support.
Simon
Comment from LLlypuk82 on 27 February 2016 at 18:35
Comment from Peter Mead on 4 March 2016 at 12:20
For the first case you’re solving it by having an associatedAddress relation with one role=object and multiple role=address members. For the second case you have an associatedAddress relation with multiple role=object and one role=address members. But what would it mean to have multiple role=object and multiple role=address members? I don’t think it’s a good idea to have one solution to two different problems.
Comment from LLlypuk82 on 4 March 2016 at 14:42
It would mean exactly that all objects have multiple address. There is my proposal page.