House numbers without addr:street and on relations?
  • Hello,

    I was wondering why some of the house numbers I had added to OpenStreetMap weren't appearing in navigator free (android).

    I think the reason might be that I had mapped only addr:housenumber, but did not add a addr:street tag, relying on the house number belonging to the closest street. It seems the mapfactor converter ignores those house numbers?

    I have now added the addr:street tag to  the ones I have mapped, but world wide, there are just over 1 million polygons (buildings) with addr:housenumber but without addr:street and another 2.7 million points with addr:housenumber and without addr:street.

    Given that there are close to 4 million house numbers world wide without an explicit street tag, would it be possible for the mapfactor converter to assign those to the closest street?

    It also appears that the converter doesn't use house numbers that are mapped on relations (multi-polygons)? 

  • 26 Comments sorted by
  • Polish community came up with the addition of "addr: place =" name of the village. And for example, now can find the address on the village. It would be nice if it could also MapFactor.
  • @apmon - yes, house numbers without street names are still ignored (even though they are collected). Up to now we considered snap to nearest road too dangerous + not all roads have name ... so small step forward would be find nearest road, but not pedestrian ... hmm.

    Can you give me example of relation multi-polygon used for house number? Some types are converted now, but probably not all.

    @polska -can you give me more details/examples? If I click on the provided link I get overview of the whole world??


  • snap to nearest road is definitely not always exact, but I would imagine that mappers mostly leave out addr:street if it is obvious to which street the house number belongs, i.e. if snap to nearest street should work correctly. So I would imagine that in the vast majority of cases that algorithm would work correctly, although I don't have any statistics to back that up.

    Regarding relations: is an example that doesn't appear to be found in navigator. 
  • An example, we have a village such as "Cieszyna 88". How did it happen in many villages in Poland there are no streets. And here is the problem of finding the address. Invented to add a tag addr: place = name of the village. Example Cieszyna 88:

    addr:city = Cieszyna,  addr:housenumber = 88 , addr:place = Cieszyna, addr: postcode = 38-125

    Nominatim can search for these addresses. And I think I can find these addresses in OsmAnd.,66.52,80.6,34.37

    I can not explain otherwise. If you want you can ask on the forum for more details.

  • associatedStreet relation works for me
  • @polska - I was going to ask how to distinguish which house number should be associated to Town/Village and which should not be. Then I realized that there is "new"(?) tag
    (with comment "warning: This article is based on the not approved proposal draft") which probably was not there before, when we first integrated house numbers. Does it mean that if there is "addr:place" and this "addr:place"=="addr:city", then it should be linked to the city center?
    p.s. feel free to forward comments/questions to Polish OSM forum ...

  • Same problem in Slovakia. If you need test data, some villages are mapped with addr:place, for example "Malá Čausa", "Veľká Čausa", "Lipník", "Chrenovec-Brusno", "Poruba", "Opatovce nad Nitrou", ...

    search for "Poruba 212" on Nominatim,48.84,18.6,48.82
  • OK, thanks - I am glad that there is used the same system as in Poland, i.e. "addr:place" ... we will collect this extra attribute and I will let you know.
  • I have some results/statistics for Slovakia (from 2014-01 planet). In particular I was interested if city or place should be used:
    mysql> select city, place, count(*) from osm_addr where place <>"" and place<>city group by city,place limit 10;
    | city                | place                  | count(*) |
    |                     | Novoveská Huta         |        4 |
    | Nitrianske Pravno   | Solka                  |        9 |
    | Spišská Nová Ves    | Ferčekovce             |      502 |
    | Spišská Nová Ves    | Novoveská Huta         |      303 |
    | Valaská Belá        | Gápel                  |       27 |
    | Žiar nad Hronom     | Šášovské podhradie     |        1 |

    I do not see "Solka", "Ferčekovce", "Gápel" and "Šášovské podhradie" in the list of city centers ... so these house numbers will be rejected? Or should the be linked to "city" in this case?

  • Some results for Poland, where place<>city and count of house numbers is bigger than 100:
    | city                | place          | count(*) |
    |                     | Dylągowa       |      170 |
    |                     | Kołbaskowo     |      101 |
    |                     | Lipniak        |      159 |
    | Choroszcz           | Klepacze       |      187 |
    | Kurowice-Modła      | Kurowice       |      105 |
    | Turośń Kościelna    | Turośń Dolna   |      119 |
    | Zabłudów            | Pawły          |      113 |
    | Zabłudów            | Ryboły         |      176 |
    | Zakroczym           | Gałachy        |      108 |

  • Hi!
    I have just fixed addresses in Klepacze, Kurowice, Turośń Dolna, Pawły, Ryboły and Zakroczym.
    I think it is not necessary to add addr:city= to addresses which have only addr:place= + addr:housenumber= (e.g. Dylągowa). An address with addr:place= has complete address information. Nominatim indexes addresses without addr:city= perfectly. Example:ągowa+98
  • Sorry for late reply.
    Nitrianske Pravno | Solka - fixed
    Spišská Nová Ves | Ferčekovce - fixed
    Spišská Nová Ves | Novoveská Huta - fixed
    Valaská Belá | Gápel - Gápel have place=hamlet
    Žiar nad Hronom | Šášovské podhradie - fixed

    Same town/villages have same parts which are more or less distant.
    Hard to suggest if in case addr:city<>addr:place link number with city or place. In this cases, "officially" should be linked to city, but I suppose some (most?) people will search with place.

    Well, for now try link it with addr:place, because in this cases villages may have two same numbers, subparts may have own numbering (at least in Slovakia).
  • Hi Kayle,
    here is first experimental version with "town house numbers" for Slovakia (from Jan 2014 planet):
    Note, that it is the very first experiment, "quick & dirty". There is no filtering for distance between city center and the house and duplicities (the same names for different city) are also not handled at the moment. Let me know if you find any problem and if you would recommend this version for Feb 2014 planet conversion (where will be your fixes).
    p.s. Zbigniew, Poland will take longer (bigger data), so I would first try to improve the script on Slovakia
  • Limit examples (probably correct), around 2km from city/town/village center:  Kolačno  Kľačno

    Mismatched are (for sure, more than 32km distance)
    Horná Ves, Poluvsie

    ... we will reject all houses more than 5km from the city/town/village center.

  • Here is updated version:
    (select the nearest town/village with the same name, max distance limit 5km)
  • Thanks. Working search for house number in villages!
    In Kolačno are some houses quite far from center and Klačno is looong village. :)
    Horná Ves and Poluvsie are villages with same name in different regions. It seems 5 km is reasonable limit (well maybe not for village Skalité, but OSM have no house numbers yet :)
    Thanks one more time.

  • Great! :-)

    Now for "polska" and Zbigniew, here is first experimental version of Poland OSM with town/village house numbers:
    I tried "Cieszyna 88" and "Dylągowa 98", and it looked OK. Again it is still from January 2014 planet.osm
    let me know, if you find any problem
    p.s. Feb planet is still not available so we may use the last (31/1/2014) instead ... (we will decide today)
  • It works great! I would to suggest increase limit to 7.5 km for Poland because some villages are big. For example: Jeżowe - and Zawoja
    Maybe you should use administrative boundaries for cases like these?
  • Thanks - I will not be able to do much changes right now (maybe increase the radius), as planet140205.osm was released couple minutes ago. I will check the examples from Zbigniew.
    the limit was increased to 10km now. I can confirm the problematic cases from Zbigniew:
    nodeId=2235843070 (6.2km), 2514668066 (7.2km)
  • BTW, I would to suggest change some translations (in polish):

    Cheers :-)

  • Hi, one question to this old thread. I don't see house numbers for
    addr:place, which are searchable. Now the question :) It's possible show
    this numbers on map? thanks
  • please give example
  • On android - search: Slovakia -> Chrenovec-Brusno -> Town House Numbers -> 201
    House number is found, but no numbers are visible on map as in towns with street name.
  • I can see this number on the map, but I have August release
    you can download it if you set Early map in Settings/advanced
  • Map was new, but I don't have this numbers long time. Erased all data, reloaded and now I see numbers. Note to myself: make more steps to try solve problem and ask later :) Thanks

Howdy, Stranger!

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

In this Discussion