[OSM-newbies] Reverse geocoding on Nominatim - acceptable, volumes ?

[Craig Wallace]

On 26/10/2010 19:36, Iain Simpson wrote:
> Thanks for comments&  suggestions.
> I've now got a 'python' routine picking up data from the Mapquest site
> in json format.
>
> I'm using the 'display_name' data which generally fits the bill.
>
> However for Staffordshire locations the county name has '(ceremonial)'
> added (presumably to cope with Stoke, Wolverhampton etc). It's rather
> messy but I'm reluctant to edit the 'County' definition without
> consultation.
>
> details below.
>
> Any thoughts ?,

I agree with this - the name tag should just be the name of the place, 
use separate tags to specify what sort of place it is.

You might want to to ask about this on the Talk-GB mailing list, it 
would make sense to agree on a standard format for all of the English 
counties. From a quick look at the list of county relations on the wiki, 
I see some include "(ceremonial)", some include "Unitary Authority", 
some include "CC", whereas most are just the name. 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/English_Counties

Also, I think it would be best if Nominatim could ignore the 
"ceremonial" boundaries for making the address, and just use the current 
administrative boundaries for that. Though others may disagree on this...


Craig