Talk:Key:noaddress

marking building with no addresses which could be implicit

Hi, I was wondering if people be opposed if one were to use application that uses `noaddress=yes` to mark buildings that have no address in cases when their detailed building type (Eg. `garage`, `shed` or similar) is not determined yet, but it is known that do not have address?

Of course, if/when detailed building type was determined and mapped (for example with `building=shed`) then `noaddress=yes` would be removed (as it would be implicit).

This sounds reasonable behavior to me, but it was pointed out that larger community might raise objections, so I though I'd ask. More discussion in tagging mailing list --mnalis (talk) 16:43, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

What's the point of this useless tag?

If it does not have an address, just leave everything blank, why introducing an useless tag to tell us? -- CBRS (talk) 01:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@CBRS: It's basically used to tell QA tools not to keep asking you for the address of a feature. Same as e.g. noname=yes or nohousenumber=yes--Kjon (talk) 09:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Using noaddress=yes if a building has more than one address

A mapper in my area is using this tag to mark buildings that have more than one address, and the addresses are mapped as nodes. I guess their goal is to mark this building as done, or maybe to discourage other mappers to add the address directly on the building. But this seems very wrong to me. Can we add a sentence about not doing this in the page? I guess it's harmless for now, but if used like this, the noaddress=* tag has lost it's meaning completely. Maybe invent a new tag, multipleaddresses=*?

Janko (talk) 15:24, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Can you link affected edits? It is entirely and clearly wrong so it can be just reverted. I can do this if situation is as clear as you describe and for some reason you prefer to avoid making reverts yourself Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:56, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Ok, now I see that StreetComplete is to blame, not the mapper. I see they are using the version 63. which is current, but from the wiki we see noaddress=* was changed to nohousenumber=* in 2019?! nohousenumber=* would still be wrong, so my user is probably using the app wrong. I'll see what I can do, I'll try to contact them.. Janko (talk) 09:45, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

"Ok, now I see that StreetComplete is to blame, not the mapper" Are these addresses unsigned or what? SC sets that only if user claims that building has no address... As someone helping to develop SC I am now even more interested in what is going on - can you report it at SC issue tracker if SC was confusing/wrong? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:04, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Ok, I was playing with the app a bit, and I think this particular user has decided that he is going to click every building, and add an address, or noaddress=yes. If I'm correct, StreetComplete doesn't show you a quest pin to enter an address if there are address nodes inside. It's just this one user that made this a quest for themself. I sent them a message, and will have to clean this up at some point. There are 168 buildings with this tag in Zagreb. Janko (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

"StreetComplete doesn't show you a quest pin to enter an address if there are address nodes inside" - exactly that. Presumably they (mis)used address overlay which allows more freeform editing Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:12, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Another turn of events, actually it's StreetComplete's fault[1]. Janko (talk) 16:36, 22 September 2026 (UTC)