Am 11.11.2019 um 13:29 schrieb Simon Poole:
.... My current suspicion is that the difference is due to streets and places that don't actually have postal addresses associated with them now being included, I couldn't pin this down with any local data, anybody else have a theory?
....
I've found a good example of this in Birmensdorf (ZH) that used to be near 100% coverage and now has 49 street matches "missing".
Explanation: the attributes for streets and places contain a value that indicates if the object is actually used in the GWR (as in: there was an address associated with it), that value has now been changed from "not used" to "used" for streets that don't actually have an address associated with them, or just have a building without an actual postal address.
The former means there is no actual geometry associated with the street in the GWR making it "difficult" to locate the road. I could however conceivably filter these out based on the fact that there are no GWR addresses with the street name, the later is more difficult to resolve as the address data distributed by the BfS doesn't contain any of the, in principle available, meta-data on building type and so on.
Any opinions on how to proceed?
Simon