Why won't it let me enter house numbers?
  • It only asks for Junction streets? It is Android on an Acer Iconia 7 tablet. Is it because it is free maps? Does it work if I buy Tom Tom maps? Do you have to use google with internet, to get exact address?
  • 20 Comments sorted by
  • when street numbers are available in the map data then you can
    search for it, for example New York/Manhattan/5th Avenue.
    Unfortunately house numbers are frequently missing in free maps, but
    are available in TomTom maps.

    Free maps are created by volunteers at www.openstreetmaps.org
    - anybody can join and help to make maps better using their local
    Having said this, we do have a built-in Google search

  • I have tested the build in google search. really nice, it works. "Internetsuche" in German version.
    But some OSM Users making the house numbers in OSM, and some house numbers in OSM are better than Google data, because some Google house numbers are wrong and some google POIs are wrong. For example know google not the difference between Kirchweg and Kirchstraße and moved a POI from the Kirchstraße to the Kirchweg in DE 09212.
    When no mobile internet available, it should with the osm data only work.
  • Navigator does work with house numbers from OSM, try Munich, Bayerstrasse for example.
  • Thats great. I have tested it in Limbach-Oberfrohna with the new germany_east_osm. Thats a new feature, i know that it was not possible. I am very happy about.

    The Boundary-Problem seems solved in Limbach-Oberfrohna, but someone added a questionable boundary again. I will see what happens with this strange Post code boundary by the next update, because the postcode-area of Limbach-Oberfrohna is now twice, one is redundant.

    I guess, the streetnames should be a relation, because mapfactor list every single part of a longer street. In the new map import the full street was on top, that´s really better than before.
  • It seems that, MapFactor recognise only old-style addresses from OSM ( stored in the "addr:street" tag)
    new-style addresses (stored as an "associatedStreet" relation with "house", "address" & "street" roles) should be preferred now when available.

    May be the reason why many house numbers are unavailable...
  • Hi lagiraudiere,
    can you give me an example (way/relation ID)? There is unfinished conversion script for interpolated houses (mainly in Argentina), but what you mean is maybe something different?
  • @lagiraudiere
    just fyi ... there exist no "old-style" and "new-style" addresses. I can not remember that I have seen associatedStreet relations but the numbers in tagwatch say that it must be used somewhere http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/type=associatedStreet
    -> used 113k times

    At least where I edit, all addresses are added in OSM in a way you call "old style"
    -> used ~25 Mio times (measured by housenumbers)

  • ...and as far as I know "associatedstreet" is still proposed in OSM-Wiki.
  • http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:associatedStreet

    @blubb in the page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr
    you can read in the addr:street key entry : "The belonging to a street can alternatively be represented by a associatedStreet relation"

    "streetRelation" has nothing to do with "interpolated houses"
    You can set an "interpolated houses" when you don't want to create every addresses in the street.
    The streetRelation allows you to attach the address to the street. Then, you can correct the name once for every street-segments and every addresses since the name used is the relation name.
  • @lagiraudiere - thanks. Can you give me an example (relation ID) and country/region where this will help you?
  • the relation :

    Country : France
    Town : Oullins
    here is a map where you can see the affected nodes :

    NB : the addresses are imported from the cadastre (land register) of the city
  • @SunCobalt

    113k streets
    2 063k "house" + 9k "address"
    so ~10% of adresses use the streetRelation

  • @lagiraudiere
    "you can read in the addr:street key entry : "The belonging to a street
    can alternatively be represented by a associatedStreet relation"

    Yes, that's right but I mean: There is no information that addr:street and addr:housenumber is "the old style" and outdated.
    If this is "the old style" then there is much work to do.
  • @lagiraudiere:
    "associatedStreet" is in use but as I wrote above it's still not approved in OSM-Wiki, but the alternate "Karlsdruhe Scheme" is. For me there schould be just one tagging-scheme for adresses, but that should be cleared up inside of OSM.
    The difference between the schemes is not "old" or "new". It's "approved" and "proposed".
  • @blubb
    I say "old" because the "addr:street" tag is older than the "associatedStreet" relation. (associatedStreet was designed because it is "more easy and less error-prone to evaluate in software")
  • @lagiraudiere
    I tried to find out Informations about a proposal for
    "associatedStreet" and couldn't find any. So I have no idea, how this scheme has been accepted "officially" in OSM.
    But anyway: it exists and is in use. And so we got that unlucky situation of two solutions for one problem, which is a sad situation for using and interpreting the OSM-database.
    So MapFactor has to decide how to handle that. Further discussions about the usage of

    "associatedStreet" or "addr:street" should been conduced toward success in OSM-forums etc.
  • @lagiraudiere - OK, thanks. I had feeling that I implemented some "relation related to house numbers" and it was for tag type=street, like relation 955100 ... so if the only difference between type=associatedStreet and type=street is this value, it should not be that difficult (?)
  • @mdx
    yes : the only difference seems to be the value of the type tag. However the "street" relation support the "address" role for its members  while "associatedStreet" doesn't.

    Thank you, Martin.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion