Talk:Key:addr:flats

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Literal addr:flats=* ?

There were only two nodes tagged with literal addr:flats=* (asterisk). I've removed that tag, as it creates more confusion.

--Richlv (talk) 11:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Exceeding 255 characters

Because OSM tag values are limited to 255 characters this can create a problem with this tag. eg. a 30 story building with unit numbers on level 10 being 1001-1014 repeated for 30 floors has to be expressed as `1010-1014;2010-2014;...`, so for an import I've proposed just using addr:flats2 addr:flats3 etc to split up the values. Not great, but I can't see any other alternative. --Aharvey (talk) 08:30, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Use without entrance=*

According to https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/addr%3Aflats#combinations only 50% of addr:flats are on an entrance node. 20% are on a building. So it appears this tag is being used in other non-entrance scenarios. In my opinion the wiki should follow current mapping practice and not stripulate that it's only on building entrances.

In my view addr:flats should go wherever the addr:housenumber is unless there are multiple entrances to a building each with access to different flats. If I've only mapped an apartment building as a single address node but know the flat numbers at that address then I can just include it on the addr:* node. If there is a single apartment building where I don't know the entrance or there are multiple entrances all with access to the units, then I can simply include addr:flats on the building=* way along with all the other addr:* tags.

See also https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4160

---Aharvey (talk) 04:10, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree, and in fact I have frequently used this tag on building areas as well as nodes - I wasn't aware of this stipulation. I think it should be changed to include areas. --Libarch (talk) 09:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

flat code with - sign

What should be done if flat code includes - sign, for example range where start code "320-1" and ending code is "320-21". Range is poorly defined anyway, so maybe one should give up?

(case is theoretical but definitely existing somewhere)

Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

I know this is often complained elsewhere. For mitigation, can you expect addr:flats=320-1-320-21 to be a symmetric range? Or can it be addr:*=320 + addr:flats=1-21? Just that they are assigned together for convenience. --- Kovposch (talk) 06:55, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Two Entrances

What should I do if there are two separate entrances to a number of flats? Should I alos tag this entrance with the same info for addr:flats? IanVG (talk) 21:56, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion - yes. It is nor marking flats itself, it is marking what is reachable from entrance Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:36, 29 April 2022 (UTC)