Hi Lorenzo, thanks again for reporting, it turned out that there was a bug in the code which creates the global search index. This was fixed with r4249: http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/websvn/revision.php?repname=mkgmap&rev=4249 @all: Expect a growth in the index (*mdr) and better results in address and street search. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> Gesendet: Montag, 12. November 2018 08:07 An: Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi; Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses Hi Lorenzo, thanks for reporting. I found this for node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5967518380 addr:city=Potenza Picena addr:housenumber=7 addr:place=Contrada Spirito Santo There is an unnamed road next to it and mkgmap assigns these labels 1) empty (because road is unnamed) 2) Strada Provinciale Potentina (because that is the closed named road) 3) Contrada Spirito Santo (because of the addr:place The same happens for other roads in this area. So far so good. Still, address search in MapSource doesn't show the name "Contrada Spirito Santo" as street name. I found out this happens because there is no road where "Contrada Spirito Santo" appears in the 1st label. It seems this is something that I did not see before. When I add a short way with highway=service,name=Contrada Spirito Santo somewhere in this area everything seems to work fine, all numbers are found. Also when I remove the name Strada Provinciale Potentina from the major road so that it is not added to the unnamed road. So, in short: mkgmap should be changed, I have to find out where. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <lomastrolo@gmail.com> Gesendet: Montag, 12. November 2018 00:11 An: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Betreff: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses I have several addr:place addresses missing in the generated map, Garmin does not show them in the address search. Examples: ----- City: Potenza Picena Street (place): Contrada Spirito Santo all numbers are missing (street is not found at all): https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/DAt ----- City: Potenza Picena Street (place): Contrada Altavilla missing numbers 2, 15, 17, 18: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/DAu Attached log file from mkgmap. Can you understad what appens from that? Thanks Lorenzo _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

There is also another number 8 which is listed under Strada Provinciale Potentina but it's not so close to that road: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919#map=16/43.3582/13.6027 Lorenzo

Hi Lorenzo, I think I understand now. The roads are first merged, next all the different addr:place names are added to the labels. The problem is that we can store only 4 labels, but in this case we would need 6. I don't know yet how to fix that. If I remember correctly I cannot split the road at this stage :-( In r4252 I've added code to compare also the addr:place name so that the number is not ignored as duplicate, but this doesn't help in this case. So I also added code to print a warning. Maybe I find a better solution during the next days... Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. November 2018 15:16 An: Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi; Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses Hi Lorenzo, I still think about a better solution. At the moment, the ways with name=Strada Provinciale Potentina are merged, next the housenumber processing finds a lot of addresses with different addr:place names next to it. I think it should split the roads into parts because of that but it doesn't happen (yet). Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <lomastrolo@gmail.com> Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. November 2018 22:24 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses There is also another number 8 which is listed under Strada Provinciale Potentina but it's not so close to that road: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919#map=16/43.3582/13.6027 Lorenzo _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

Ok Gerd, no worries :) I guess a service road should also have a name and different from the main road to avoid merging because in my previous example there were already several unnamed roads around the housenumber. Right? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919 Lorenzo Il giorno mer, 28/11/2018 alle 08.22 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto:

Hi Lorenzo, I don't see an easy solution for that problem in mkgmap. All I can suggest now is to map a service road where this happens :-( Gerd ________________________________________Von: mkgmap-dev < mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. November 2018 16:14An: Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi; Development list for mkgmapBetreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses Hi Lorenzo, I think I understand now. The roads are first merged, next all the different addr:place names are added to the labels.The problem is that we can store only 4 labels, but in this case we would need 6. I don't know yet how to fix that. If I remember correctly I cannot split the road at this stage :-( In r4252 I've added code to compare also the addr:place name so that the number is not ignored as duplicate, but this doesn't help in this case.So I also added code to print a warning. Maybe I find a better solution during the next days... Gerd ________________________________________Von: mkgmap-dev < mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. November 2018 15:16An: Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi; Development list for mkgmapBetreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses Hi Lorenzo, I still think about a better solution. At the moment, the ways with name=Strada Provinciale Potentina are merged,next the housenumber processing finds a lot of addresses with different addr:place names next to it. I think it should split the roads into parts because of that but it doesn't happen (yet). Gerd ________________________________________Von: mkgmap-dev < mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <lomastrolo@gmail.com>Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. November 2018 22:24An: Development list for mkgmapBetreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses There is also another number 8 which is listed under Strada ProvincialePotentina but it's not so close to that road: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919#map=16/43.3582/13.6027

Lorenzo _______________________________________________mkgmap-dev mailing listmkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________mkgmap-dev mailing listmkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________mkgmap-dev mailing listmkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

It seems to me that road merging in presence of addr:place addresses causes the incorrect propagation of labels to nearby streets. For example, I see this unnamed road gets the label "Strada Provinciale Potentina". https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/209592070 This name does not come from an address, it is the name of a nearby street and should not be here. Lorenzo Il giorno dom, 02/12/2018 alle 17.25 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto:

Hi Lorenzo, an unnamed service road should solve the problem because the numbers are not assigned to the same road. Gerd ________________________________________Von: mkgmap-dev < mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <lomastrolo@gmail.com>Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Dezember 2018 18:17An: Development list for mkgmapBetreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses Ok Gerd, no worries :) I guess a service road should also have a name and different from the main road to avoid merging because in my previous example there were already several unnamed roads around the housenumber. Right? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919

Lorenzo Il giorno mer, 28/11/2018 alle 08.22 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto: Hi Lorenzo,

I don't see an easy solution for that problem in mkgmap. All I can suggest now is to map a service road where this happens :-(

Gerd

If I understand correctly I would say yes. unclassified roads should be tagged with name=* in osm if they have a name and should not take names from nearby roads. Lorenzo Il giorno dom, 02/12/2018 alle 18.29 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto:

This doesn't happen because of road merging, it is a - normally - wanted result of the housenumber processing.Maybe I should change the code so that unclassified roads are not treated like service roads here. Gerd ________________________________________Von: mkgmap-dev < mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <lomastrolo@gmail.com>Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Dezember 2018 19:22An: Development list for mkgmapBetreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses It seems to me that road merging in presence of addr:place addresses causes the incorrect propagation of labels to nearby streets. For example, I see this unnamed road gets the label "Strada Provinciale Potentina".https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/209592070 This name does not come from an address, it is the name of a nearby street and should not be here.

Lorenzo

Il giorno dom, 02/12/2018 alle 17.25 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto: Hi Lorenzo,

an unnamed service road should solve the problem because the numbers are not assigned to the same road.

Gerd

________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev < <mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk

...

im Auftrag von Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <

<mailto:lomastrolo@gmail.com> lomastrolo@gmail.com

Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Dezember 2018 18:17 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses

Ok Gerd, no worries :)

I guess a service road should also have a name and different from the main road to avoid merging because in my previous example there were already several unnamed roads around the housenumber. Right? <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919

Lorenzo

Il giorno mer, 28/11/2018 alle 08.22 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto:

Hi Lorenzo,

I don't see an easy solution for that problem in mkgmap. All I can suggest now is to map a service road where this happens :-(

Gerd

Hi all, this is for sure confusing. I think the problem is in the data flow. Current implementation works like this: 1) Single OSM ways are passed to the style rules 2) The style can create 0, 1 or more routable lines (=roads) and 0 or more other lines for this single OSM way. 3) The next step is to fix "wrong angles" so that zig-zagging is reduced 4) Now ways that represent roads are merged when they have similar attributes 5) The ways representing roads are then converted to a different data structure called MapRoad. 6) Finally the housenumber code tries to add address information to those MapRoad instances. There are several concepts in OSM to represent adresses, the normal one is addr:housenumber + addr:street, another one is the combination of addr:housenumber + addr:place. The latter is typically used in rural areas where you have a few buildings with the same addr:place value. In reality, those buildings often have a service way but it is rarely mapped. If it is mapped mkgmap tries to add the address information to that service road. This also means that it has to add a label to an unnamed road, else address search would not work. Without a nearby service road it adds the address information to the next best road. If that road has a name that doesn't match the name given with addr:place mkgmap adds another label for the place name. The problem starts when such a "next best road" passes several places with different names since roads can only have 4 labels. The merging (step 4) should probably be moved to the end of this chain and the housenumber processing should be able to split a way when it cannot add enough labels or maybe add a "virtual" service road where needed. Such a virtual road would have a zero length, zero road class and speed. I have to try how that would influence routing. Same with splitting. Both methods may make the road less attractive. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Greg Troxel <gdt@lexort.com> Gesendet: Montag, 3. Dezember 2018 02:34 An: Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi Cc: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <lomastrolo@gmail.com> writes:

If I understand correctly I would say yes. unclassified roads should be tagged with name=* in osm if they have a name and should not take names from nearby roads.

I am really not following what's going on. Most unclassified roads will have a name and some might not. Some service roads (and tracks) will have names and most will not. Addresses on building/nodes will have a variety of address components. Typically, an address with a given addr:street will be located reasonably close to some highway way with that same name. But not necessarily; the world is not designed by computer scientists :-) I"m not really clear on addr:place; that sounds like a name from the settlment hierarchy rather than the administrative hierarchy, and which is used in addressing will depend on local customs. I think this question is about putting address ranges on named highway ways, because the garmin format doesn't represent individual addresses. I can certainly see merging ways that are the same in tags that mkgmap considers important (ignoring width changes, etc.). But I don't understand merging ways with names and ways without names. A further complexity is address points far from the road in question, and perhaps closer to some other road (e.g. a 1 km driveway). There, I could see a process of figuring out that the address point and the named way are related by the service road and thus the address point should perhaps be considered to be on the named way where the service road connects. I admit to never having taken the time to make addressing work in my garmin maps so far; I mostly use them for hiking and I use OSMAnd for car navigation. _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

Hi Greg, the effect on routing would be the increased number of so called routing nodes. When I change mkgmap to add zero length service roads those have to be connected to the road network, else you get problems with routing. Such a connection is a routing node. My experience is that Garmin prefers roads with fewer routing nodes. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: Greg Troxel <gdt@lexort.com> Gesendet: Montag, 3. Dezember 2018 15:18 An: Gerd Petermann Cc: Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi; Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> writes:

this is for sure confusing. I think the problem is in the data flow.

thanks - I am starting to understand.

Current implementation works like this: 1) Single OSM ways are passed to the style rules 2) The style can create 0, 1 or more routable lines (=roads) and 0 or more other lines for this single OSM way. 3) The next step is to fix "wrong angles" so that zig-zagging is reduced 4) Now ways that represent roads are merged when they have similar attributes 5) The ways representing roads are then converted to a different data structure called MapRoad. 6) Finally the housenumber code tries to add address information to those MapRoad instances. There are several concepts in OSM to represent adresses, the normal one is addr:housenumber + addr:street, another one is the combination of addr:housenumber + addr:place. The latter is typically used in rural areas where you have a few buildings with the same addr:place value. In reality, those buildings often have a service way but it is rarely mapped. If it is mapped mkgmap tries to add the address information to that service road. This also means that it has to add a label to an unnamed road, else address search would not work. Without a nearby service road it adds the address information to the next best road. If that road has a name that doesn't match the name given with addr:place mkgmap adds another label for the place name. The problem starts when such a "next best road" passes several places with different names since roads can only have 4 labels.

I would say that the basic problem is that the way garmin format represents addresses does not match the way the world is, and does not match the OSM data model. Adding street names to streets that do not have names seems to me to risk unintended confusion. (Note that I live in an area where there is a legal requirement for addresses to be housenumber/road-name, driven by both the post office and emergency services response. In Massachusettts, US, we are talking about importing government address data, and one of the quality checks on individiual addresses is "is there a road in OSM with that name, which is nearby enough". But that's the plan in our area, legally, and I realize other places are different.) Wtih addr:housenumber and addr:place, I would expect that often there is no road with the same value as addr:place. I would think that if you talked to the local inhabitants they would say that this is correct. Even if a place of "Fooville" had a "Fooville Road", it probably doesn't match exactly. (Around me, roads are often named for the town they go to, but it's town "Concord" and road "Concord Road".) Perhaps the Garmin data structure reflects the US notions of addresses being #/road-name. Overall, I think your idea of having road objects with some not-really-there attributes (zero length, if it works), and putting the addressing information on them is the right approach, in cases when there is not an actual road with a missing name. That lets the address search use the data structure, even though there is in fact no road with that name, and it seems to cause the least amount of confusion. Probably searching for that name as a road name will turn up things, but that may not be avoidable. I would suggest that if the road is zero length, then there's no worry about road class and speed; if it appears as a service road with a 20 km/hr speed limit for the 0m, then that doesn't seem harmful in terms of misleading any human or machine data consumers. But there might be a way to not have the road turn in up road name search. And, if the route ends near the address, it probably doesn't matter if it includes the 0-length way, as long as the way is found in address search. I hope this is helpful, and thanks for your work over many years. Being able to get OSM data on my garmin units is part of what made me start mapping.

Thanks, I see some improvement.

Possible problem: I also see many roads in this area which are tagged as highway=unclassified which probably should betagged highway=service or residential, for example way 582373155.

I agree. I need to check this.

Another problem is e.g. unnamed way 582525015:- Some numbers close to it have addr:place=Contrada Castelletta- One has addr:place=Contrada Spirito Santo addr:housenumber=6 (node 5967518378)Because of the different addr:place names the road gets two labels:label0 = "", label1=Contrada Castelletta and label2=Contrada Spirito Santo Now, when I search in MapSource for Number 6 , Street=Contrada Castelletta I find multiple places,one is the correct one from node 5993083300, the others are wrong. One of the wrong onesis the above node 5967518378.The patch doesn't help here, mkgmap has to split those roads instead of adding multiple labels for differentaddr:place values. Needs more work...

I know. A similar thing also happens every time an addr:place address is near a named road, you can find the number under the road name too. Lorenzo Il giorno lun, 03/12/2018 alle 15.54 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto:

Hi Lorenzo, attached is a small patch to change mkgmap so that it doesn't try to find a name for unnamed roads with road class > 0 or road speed > 2.It helps for the problem with way 209592070.Possible problem: I also see many roads in this area which are tagged as highway=unclassified which probably should betagged highway=service or residential, for example way 582373155.Another problem is e.g. unnamed way 582525015:- Some numbers close to it have addr:place=Contrada Castelletta- One has addr:place=Contrada Spirito Santo addr:housenumber=6 (node 5967518378)Because of the different addr:place names the road gets two labels:label0 = "", label1=Contrada Castelletta and label2=Contrada Spirito Santo Now, when I search in MapSource for Number 6 , Street=Contrada Castelletta I find multiple places,one is the correct one from node 5993083300, the others are wrong. One of the wrong onesis the above node 5967518378.The patch doesn't help here, mkgmap has to split those roads instead of adding multiple labels for differentaddr:place values. Needs more work... Gerd

________________________________________Von: mkgmap-dev < mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <lomastrolo@gmail.com>Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Dezember 2018 19:46An: Development list for mkgmapBetreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses If I understand correctly I would say yes.unclassified roads should be tagged with name=* in osm if they have a name and should not take names from nearby roads.

Lorenzo

Il giorno dom, 02/12/2018 alle 18.29 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto: This doesn't happen because of road merging, it is a - normally - wanted result of the housenumber processing. Maybe I should change the code so that unclassified roads are not treated like service roads here.

Gerd

________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev < <mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk

...

im Auftrag von Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <

<mailto:lomastrolo@gmail.com> lomastrolo@gmail.com

Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Dezember 2018 19:22 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses

It seems to me that road merging in presence of addr:place addresses causes the incorrect propagation of labels to nearby streets.

For example, I see this unnamed road gets the label "Strada Provinciale Potentina". <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/209592070> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/209592070

This name does not come from an address, it is the name of a nearby street and should not be here.

Lorenzo

Il giorno dom, 02/12/2018 alle 17.25 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto:

Hi Lorenzo,

an unnamed service road should solve the problem because the numbers are not assigned to the same road.

Gerd

________________________________________

Von: mkgmap-dev <

<mailto: <mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk

<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk

im Auftrag von Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <

<mailto: <mailto:lomastrolo@gmail.com> lomastrolo@gmail.com

<mailto:lomastrolo@gmail.com> lomastrolo@gmail.com

Gesendet: Sonntag, 2. Dezember 2018 18:17

An: Development list for mkgmap

Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Missing addr:place addresses

Ok Gerd, no worries :)

I guess a service road should also have a name and different from the main road to avoid merging because in my previous example there were already several unnamed roads around the housenumber. Right?

< <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919

<https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569912919

Lorenzo

Il giorno mer, 28/11/2018 alle 08.22 +0000, Gerd Petermann ha scritto:

Hi Lorenzo,

I don't see an easy solution for that problem in mkgmap. All I can suggest now is to map a service road where this happens :-(

Gerd

_______________________________________________mkgmap-dev mailing listmkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev