Long ago the only person to put house numbers on the map in my area
was… me.
Nowadays the map has had a government address node import. Hooray, the
numbers I put on the map are no longer needed. Leaving them on causes
double numbers,
Can someone give me official permission to take them back off?
How many duplicates are there? If not too many then conflating them if polygons or merging if nodes would likely be better than deleting. That should retain the history better.
And, in fact, whoever did the import of government address information should have done that on the import.
I cleaned up all the unnecessary double information that I made in the first place.
But they all got put back on the map
And nobody’s now going to adopt these useless double information points to maintain them forever and ever either.
In fact, instead of me spending additional hours to fix them all back up again, only to have them all reverted at a click of a button, maybe somebody could fix them for me.
The “official” official nodes seem to be unattached (as in not even in a building outline), the question is if that is intentional/a good thing or not.
But one thing is VERY sure, you are not going to get “official” anything here and you’ve participated long enough in OSM to know that. You will have to arrange yourself with the taiwanese community and find a solution with them.
Regarding addresses in Taiwan in general, any reason to keep addr:full on the imported nodes? The address structure is exemplary, with virtually all of them following a city/district/ward/neighborhood/street hierarchy. The mechanical concatenation of these parts into addr:full is therefore redundant.
See addr:full in the wiki:
Use this for a full-text, often multi-line, address if you find the structured address fields unsuitable for denoting the address
As a matter of fact, I have some proposals for that field in regards to Taiwan.
Regarding the superfluous addresses, people are just going to look to the earliest edits and will see my name. But you can’t blame me, I can’t take them off without them getting put back on.
Are you referring to the duplication of nodes and buildings, or the addr:full part?
Who puts them back on? Is it an automated script that runs periodically?
I’m not aware of addr:official, it is not documented in the wiki. Not sure it would be very useful, given that the address scheme in TW is already very detailed and precise – but then again, I don’t know all the nuances.
What is “fullwidth”? Is this the number formatting that zero-fills house numbers?
Let’s take
for example.
Node 1 慶福街
Node 373號 慶福街
House 1 慶福街
My solution is to
as it is totally superseded by Node 373號.
And also
But in Changeset: 175272266 | OpenStreetMap they all come
flying back. So now the map has one house with three numbers, two now wrong
too.
And in Way: 1-5 慶福街 (479988567) | OpenStreetMap the old number has
even forced the new number off the map. Why can’t we just remove the
superfluous number from the house?
What’s fullwidth?
$ unicode ８8|grep EIGHT
U+FF18 FULLWIDTH DIGIT EIGHT
U+0038 DIGIT EIGHT
but never mind that for now.
By the way,
Okay, I introduced a Bill in Congress, I mean an iDea in iD
that perhaps will prevent the situation from happening next time.
IMHO manual edits shouldn’t be discouraged. Instead, imports should use conflation to avoid introducing duplicates.
Do we know if this was even attempted with the import in question?
Also, how would iD know where to give this warning? Not every country has open address data, so manually adding addresses is sometimes the only option. But you say in the Github issue that this is applicable to the entire world.
And where official data is available, sometimes it is done as a one time import so manual editing is needed to keep it up to date. Or the import may be a complex process that happens infrequently, so it still makes sense to correct the OSM data in the meantime. Or official data may be incorrect or incomplete beyond the scale that individual mappers can fix by contacting government bodies.
The warning might make sense in countries where there is systematic importing of official address data on an ongoing basis, but I suspect those countries are a minority.
Even so.
France has open data addresses, but it’s made at commune level (about 35,000 in France). Some data sets are excellent, some have many addresses at the same place. We have seen hamlets if not villages having all addresses on one point. The administration asks them to update their dataset, good, but in the mean time better NOT to import. For others, in rare cases we have duplicates (postal and entrance for instance).