> Hi, > > I think I should have been more explicit in the previous mail... > What is the reason you prefer 'addr:ref' over 'addr:alternatehouse'? > As I said, I do not mind having one or the other, but I should send > some > argument to Czech mail list why we need to modify all our address > nodes. > > Sorry for not being clear for the first time, > Radek Cernoch > > Shaun McDonald píše v Út 12. 05. 2009 v 18:28 +0100: >> Hi, >> >> As long as it is documented, it shouldn't be a problem. Don't worry >> about the fact that no one has used it yet. All tags need to start >> from somewhere. >> >> Shaun >> >> On 12 May 2009, at 16:07, Radomir Cernoch wrote: >> >>> Hi! >>> >>> this sounds better to me. I've checked the world through XAPI and >>> 'addr:ref' is not used anywhere. Even though I do not see a reason >>> for >>> changing all the Czech address nodes, I am fine with 'addr:ref'. >>> >>> My only worry is how systematic this would be. In fact we need to >>> draw >>> the value of this field on the map. Do you think it is suitable to >>> render a field 'addr:ref'? I'm just afraid of confusing other >>> people, >>> who might think that 'addr:ref' is used just like standard 'ref'. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Radek >>> >>> Shaun McDonald píše v Út 12. 05. 2009 v 00:10 +0100: >>>> addr:ref then >>>> On 11 May 2009, at 23:51, Radomir Cernoch wrote: >>>> >>>>> But what if someone creates a node with a single attribute >>>>> 'ref=300'? >>>>> I'm afraid it's going to be ambiguous. >>>>> >>>>> As I've already written, this number system is really a part of >>>>> the >>>>> official address and therefore we need 'addr:something' key. >>>>> Even in case of a node with single attribute, it must be clear >>>>> that >>>>> such >>>>> node represents an address. >>>>> >>>>> Radek >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Shaun McDonald píše v Po 11. 05. 2009 v 23:22 +0100: >>>>>> How about ref for reference then? >>>>>> >>>>>> On 11 May 2009, at 20:03, Radomir Cernoch wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the problem is more subtle. Imagine a Czech house: >>>>>>> addr:street=Lidická >>>>>>> addr:housenumber=1 >>>>>>> addr:alternatenumber=300 >>>>>>> then the "official" way of writing the address is >>>>>>> Lidická 300/1 >>>>>>> which is exactly what we have on our ID cards. The >>>>>>> 'alternatenumber' >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> really considered a part of the address and I guess it would be >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> same >>>>>>> in other countries having the same system. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Unfortunately 'name' can't be used for this purpose, because >>>>>>> numbered >>>>>>> houses can also be named. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Radek Černoch >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Russ Nelson píše v Po 11. 05. 2009 v 14:42 -0400: >>>>>>>> Radomir Cernoch writes: >>>>>>>>> The second system, which we currently store in >>>>>>>>> 'alternatenumber' ("číslo >>>>>>>>> popisné") defines a unique number of a house within a >>>>>>>>> village/ >>>>>>>>> town >>>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>>> suburb. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sounds more like a house name, in that the numbers have zero >>>>>>>> relationship to the location of the house. Thus, I venture to >>>>>>>> suggest >>>>>>>> that it doesn't belong in the addr: subset of names. If >>>>>>>> numbered >>>>>>>> houses never also have names, maybe you should just use >>>>>>>> "name=" ? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Radomir Cernoch >>> +44 750 708 8293 / +420 607 282 031 >>> Email, Jabber: radomir.cernoch na gmail.com >>> >> > -- > Radomir Cernoch > +44 750 708 8293 / +420 607 282 031 > Email, Jabber: radomir.cernoch na gmail.com >