4 ms·
Hear hear. When I'm on a computer I usually go to Google because if I go to OSM and type in a nearby major road, it gives me a list of addresses. And the one I
by squiggleblaz 9y ago
Hear hear. When I'm on a computer I usually go to Google because if I go to OSM and type in a nearby major road, it gives me a list of addresses. And the one I want is probably thirtieth on the list and has a form that is obscure. If you can't search for street names in OSM, it shouln't let me try. Instead of giving me useless results, it should direct me to how I can obtain useful results.
"Commercial Road" - no relevant results in two pages.
"Commercial Road malvern" - no results at all. It turns out in Malvern, Commercial Rd is called Malvern Rd. It seems cruel that OSM requires me to tell it exactly what I'm searching for and to get it right. Giving related information to help the search doesn't help it find the location.
"Sydney Road" - no relevant results.
"Sydney Road brunswick" - finally, the first result is listed as "Sydney Road, Brunswick, City of Moreland, Greater Melbourne, Victoria, 3052, Australia", but it's death by too much information. (a) It's buried in a list of very similar results and I can't quite be sure the one I got is the one I want - this becomes a bigger problem with a minor street. (b) who cares that it's in the city of Moreland? If you're going to list the local administrative district name, why not also the state electoral division? Address are place names, and "City of Moreland" simply isn't a place name. It's the name of the territory controlled by the Moreland City Council, but it's not a placename. Combining (a) and (b), take a look at "Sydney Road, Sparta Place, Brunswick, City of Moreland, Greater Melbourne, Victoria, 3039, Australia". What's that even supposed to mean? I cry.
Google suffers the problem in the opposite way, normalising addresses to the most obscure and ambiguous form they could find, preferring road numbers to names, and using "Melbourne" instead of the suburb name. But at least it finds the place I'm after. OSM is barely useable. Not for want of data, but because it just doesn't care to tell me how to find what I'm looking for. It's exhausting. OSM is useless for practical purposes. I want to use it for a variety of reasons, but I can't.
- jmkb 9y agoThe default search functionality on OSM ("reverse geocoding" in mapspeak) does, indeed, need a lot of improvement. It's actually a separate project called Nominatim[1]. It's on Github and you can browse the issues and see a lot of similar complaints. It's a daunting problem, parsing a free text query that may be in any language and trying to best match it with addresses that are standardized a hundred different ways all over the globe. In its current state it isn't good enough for everyday use. It's annoying how often a Google Maps search sends me to the wrong state or even the wrong country. But with Nominatim it's almost a given. This underscores one of the fundamental features/bugs of the OSM project: It's pretty good at attracting mappers, developers, and 3rd-party projects that use its data and APIs, but it's never really been designed to meet the needs of end users. UX, according to the classic OSM schema, is to be implemented by the various 3rd parties in whatever way suits them best. If someone wants to develop and host a Google Maps replacement using OSM data they're welcome to do it (and they can provide their own reverse geocoding solution if necessary) but that's not an immediate goal of OSM itself, according to the current leadership. [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim