Should we exclued bridges from housenumber processing?
Hi all, Mario Batschke suggested in a private mail to use highway=* & bridge=yes {set mkgmap:numbers=false} in the finalize section for lines so that addresses are not assigned to bridges. I think this is a good idea. He also suggested to exclude tunnels, but I see quite a lot cases where this doesn't improve the address search, e.g. for shops in underground stations. Any comments? Gerd
Are there not going to be some complaints from Florence for example? Why should it be invalid by definition to have an address on a bridge? Sometimes the bridges are tagged (often wrongly, IMHO) with the name of the bridge and not the name of the road carried by the bridge. Some people use bridge_name=* to make it explicit, but often you see the value of name=* changing for a bridge. I expect it would be up to the local authority whether any addresses which might be present are given the name of the bridge, or the name of the road leading to the bridge. //colin On 2015-06-06 16:29, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi all,
Mario Batschke suggested in a private mail to use highway=* & bridge=yes {set mkgmap:numbers=false} in the finalize section for lines so that addresses are not assigned to bridges.
I think this is a good idea.
He also suggested to exclude tunnels, but I see quite a lot cases where this doesn't improve the address search, e.g. for shops in underground stations.
Any comments?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev [1]
Links: ------ [1] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> writes:
Mario Batschke suggested in a private mail to use highway=* & bridge=yes {set mkgmap:numbers=false} in the finalize section for lines so that addresses are not assigned to bridges.
I think this is a good idea.
He also suggested to exclude tunnels, but I see quite a lot cases where this doesn't improve the address search, e.g. for shops in underground stations.
I don't see why an address shouldn't be valid just because it's on a road that happens to be a bridge. It would be good to get pointers to the situations where people think this proposed rule makes sense, and we can then see if we think there are tagging errors.
On 6/6/15 7:30 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
I don't see why an address shouldn't be valid just because it's on a road that happens to be a bridge. It would be good to get pointers to the situations where people think this proposed rule makes sense, and we can then see if we think there are tagging errors. there are bridges in old European cities which have buildings with addresses physically on the bridge. such a rule would be problematic.
richard -- rwelty@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search
participants (4)
-
Colin Smale -
Gerd Petermann -
Greg Troxel -
Richard Welty