Diffrentiation from addr:street and addr:housenumber

[IpswichMapper]

Currently, buildings with any addr:* key get drawn in the default brown colour. The address tab is useful for finding which areas have been surveyed for addresses. Whithout being able to diffrentiate these, it loses it usefulness.

One fix would be to make houses without individual identifying tags grey, or some other colours, while houses with those tags remain brown (and black for nodes).

Individual identifying tags are, for example- addr:housenumber, addr:housename, addr:full.

These identify individual nodes/way, while tags such as addr:place and addr:street do not.

101

Is this issue related?

It would be useful if this could be fixed, as Wiki pages on certain towns shows OSMI maps to show where house-numbers are present and where they aren't

[IpswichMapper]

Will this be fixed. it is making the address view look very misleading. It would be rwally useful if it could be fixed quickly. I don't think it is that hard.

[ltog]

@IpswichMapper : So, if I understood you correctly, you'd like to see the following:

• Buildings (ways) with any of addr:housenumber, addr:housename, addr:full: brown
• Buildings (ways) with any of addr:street, addr:place but without any of addr:housenumber, addr:housename, addr:full: gray
• Buildings (ways) not matching any of the above criteria: blank

I'd propose a change to that:

• Buildings (ways) with any of (addr:street and addr:housenumber) or (addr:place and addr:housenumber) or addr:full or addr:housename: brown
• Buildings (ways) with any `addr:* but not matching the above: gray
• Buildings (ways) not matching any of the above criteria: blank

There are two large BUTs:

1. Adding another layer/color will result in quite some work. It's doable but probably not with changing only one or two lines of code. Only changing the definition of "brown" buildings would certainly be easier. The current definition (at https://github.com/ltog/osmi-addresses/blob/f0cb0ea85529b975d9c9942c23b41cfc57c98297/osmi/WaysWithAddressesWriter.hpp#L30-L35 ) might indeed be not that useful, since it also shows buildings that are only partially mapped (e.g. addr:housenumber without addr:street) We might change that to something like if (houseno && (street || place) || addrfull || addrhousename) {
2. osmi-addresses is not fully maintained anymore. I won't be able to do these changes in the near future. Maybe @Nakaner or @woodpeck can help? To get an up-to-date view of buildings that need address tagging, the Overpass API might prove useful. The kinds of queries we talked about are not that hard to implement. In combination with e.g. uMap you might be able to build a map that shows exactly what you want, do this in realtime and you would not even require your own hosting.

[IpswichMapper]

Hello, thanks for the response.

I think a good quickfix would be simply not display houses with only addr:street tags or addr:place tags, but only to display those with a combination of tags that you proposed (number + street, number + place, full address etc.)

Overpass Turbo is nowhere nearly as good. It doesn't show addresses that have no street in pink (i.e. ones with errors, or ones with outdated taggins such as associatedstreet), it doesn't distuinguish as clearly between nodes and ways. It also doesn't show what roads the addresses are attached to, which is a really useful feature for telling if the addr:street tag of a building or node is correct or not.