#23302 closed enhancement (fixed)
[patch] Create a preference for address duplicate detection to include buildings and POIs, not just plain address nodes
Reported by: | zyphlar | Owned by: | team |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 23.12 |
Component: | Core validator | Version: | |
Keywords: | address duplicate | Cc: |
Description (last modified by )
Currently, if a building area or business node is tagged with an address but a new address POI is created nearby, JOSM and MapWithAI don't detect it as a duplicate. This is a sane and liberal default for most people who don't want excessive warnings, however it isn't strictly accurate: "123 Main Street, Unit B" probably shouldn't exist in two places at once.
The main exception to this of course is if there are two un-mergeable businesses or POIs at the same location that do have the same address.
This patch allows the user to select if they want more extensive duplicate address detection, which scans all objects in an area (including buildings, businesses, POIs, etc) not just abstract floating address nodes. It includes all supported objects in the address detection routine, and downgrades the alert from WARNING to OTHER for objects with identical addresses but differing "name" tags.
Attachments (1)
Change History (10)
by , 15 months ago
Attachment: | validatePoi.patch added |
---|
comment:1 by , 15 months ago
Description: | modified (diff) |
---|
comment:2 by , 15 months ago
comment:3 by , 15 months ago
Thanks for the help with the unit testing, I bit off a lot with this first attempt but I manually tested. With the new checkbox checked, different way/node/shop/amenity should make no difference. All nearby address duplication (defined as street+number+unit+floor I believe) will generate either a Warning or Other. That decision is based on whether the city or name is different (downgrades to Other.)
So two 123 Main St nodes with no names should be a warning.
Same situation but one named "ABC Store", should generate an Other.
Same situation but one named "ABC Store" and the other named "XYZ Store" should generate an Other.
Same situation but both named "ABC Store" should generate a warning.
Repeat all the above but both are building ways or one is a building and the other is a node and it should produce the same results.
comment:4 by , 15 months ago
Component: | Core → Core validator |
---|---|
Keywords: | address duplicate added |
comment:6 by , 14 months ago
Milestone: | → 23.12 |
---|
comment:7 by , 14 months ago
@zyphlar: As a heads up, I've been putting together a list of username -> name + emails for if/when we move JOSM core to git
.
If you have a preferred name and email, you can do one of the following:
- Put it in this ticket
- Send me an email (taylor.smock@… or tsmock@…)
- Send me a message on OSM (https://osm.org/user/vorpalblade)
Important notes:
The email and name will be public due to how git
works (the repo will probably be mirrored to GitHub, at the very least).
comment:9 by , 12 months ago
I'm not sure if that's a duplicate, it seems like he wants less warnings when POIs have duplicate addresses but the intent of this is to make more warnings. A side effect might be more sanity or fine grained options but he wants a validator for lots of existing businesses and my use case is validating imports of bare address points. It's probably worth testing both of our use cases: by default two amenities with the same exact address shouldn't generate a warning (maybe just an info?) but then when enabling this new option an amenity and a bare address point should generate a warning (we don't need to add bare addresses on top of things that already have addresses.)
I'm writing a unit test for this.
Is
way building=yes addr:housenumber=1 addr:street=Foo
supposed to throw a warning withnode amenity=shop addr:housenumber=1 addr:street=Foo
or justnode name=FooBar addr:housenumber=1 addr:street=Foo
?From the code, it looks like you define a Point of Interest as having a name. This won't always be the case for a PoI -- some are just generic locations.