[Tagging] Proposal: expanded address tags for US

David ``Smith'' vidthekid at gmail.com
Wed Nov 21 00:52:23 GMT 2012


On Nov 20, 2012 5:42 PM, "Martin Koppenhöfer" <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
>
> Am 20/nov/2012 um 08:05 schrieb "David ``Smith''" <vidthekid at gmail.com>:
>
>> That varies by city.  In Cleveland, this is true.  But in Columbus, 200
North Third Street and 200 South Third Street are two distinct addresses on
the very same Third Street.
>>
>> Still, I think the Karlsruhe Schema is sufficient.  I'm willing to
accept [addr:street=N 3rd St] even as I insist that for the street itself,
[name=Third Street].
>
>
> What about putting 200 North in addr:housenumber and addr:street could
remain Third Street. Addr:street should be the same as street to get the
relation.

That would be cool, but I don't think anything supports that kind of
formatting at this time.  And not everybody agrees with my interpretation.
Some folks will say that, even though North Third Street and South Third
Street are the same street, the North or South is part of the name anyway.
This could be a barrier to implementing support for addr:housenumber=200 N.

Also, the street name in addresses doesn't always match the name of the
street.  For example, there are houses on Old Walker Road which retain
Walker Rd addresses.  And the name Lilly Chapel Opossum Run Road is so
long, the local post office recognizes addresses like 4600 Lilly Chapel
Opossum Rd.  (Yes, they shortened it by dropping the shortest word. Go
figure.)  Furthermore, I think addr:street should be written using the
abbreviation the USPS prefers, which probably isn't the same as the
unabbreviated street name, and might not be the same as the abbreviation
used on street signs.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20121120/c67085f7/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list