Is this something that we should expect and deal with it properly, a rare exception or a bug?
Best Uch
Uch
unread,
Nov 13, 2025, 7:27:31 AM (10 days ago) Nov 13
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to GeoAdminCh API
I know now, that this is likely because of the API update and the search uses by default the layer ch.swisstopo.amtliches-gebaeudeadressverzeichnis instead of GWR. However, I'm wondering why this happens there too.
webk...@gmail.com
unread,
Nov 13, 2025, 8:23:27 AM (10 days ago) Nov 13
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
I hope that helps.Best regards,Helpdesk federal geoportal
Uch
unread,
Nov 14, 2025, 3:02:21 AM (9 days ago) Nov 14
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to GeoAdminCh API
No, it seems to persist:
Uch
unread,
Nov 14, 2025, 3:02:25 AM (9 days ago) Nov 14
Reply to author
Sign in to reply to author
Forward
Sign in to forward
Delete
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Copy link
Report message
Show original message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to GeoAdminCh API
Figured it out. This is the case for addresses in Liechtenstein. So this is likely intended although breaking with the previous pattern of the detail attribute.
On Thursday, 13 November 2025 at 14:23:27 UTC+1 webk...@gmail.com wrote: