[Tagging] Golf tag combinations

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 2 15:06:36 UTC 2018


On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 02/08/18 23:00, Paul Allen wrote:
>


> I recently came across someone adding the address as the name,
> unfortunately one of the buildings had a real name that I recalled .. and
> it was not the address.
> So while the address may be displayed outside on the building facade, I
> would not take it to be the name of the building without further evidence.
>

This one was a difficult call.  On its own I'd have said it was a
pretentious way of displaying the house number.
But there's a name plate in the same material, style, font and lack of
weathering for "The Annexe" which is arrived
at via a footpath at the side which leads to a rear extension of the
building.  The building in question had no other
identification but through the window I could see it was an office of some
nature.   It also had an entry phone  with
a notice saying that callers needed an appointment.  The Annexe, though,
identified the function of the place.

I know, from the Annexe signage, they were hiding their function from the
general public.  Although I understand their
reasoning, I also know that security through obscurity doesn't work (but
I'm respecting their secrecy anyway).  Although
they don't want the general public to know what they do, they want their
legitimate callers to be sure they've found the
right place.  A housename unlikely to appear on any other house on a
different street meets that need.  I'd have chosen
something like "Coprolite" or "Tibetan Blackbird" but not everyone has my
sense of humour.

The other thing about using "Number 39" as a house name is that they don't
have to go through the process of
formally registering the name with the County Council, which they are
legally required to do (almost nobody does,
but they're supposed to).  They can tell the council it's just a number,
not a name, and the council would have
better things to do than push the point.

Difficult call, but it quacked more like a house name than a number.  As
you can see from this (which I don't
use for mapping but is acceptable for making a point here):
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.0824887,-4.6596585,3a,15y,119.06h,86.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shXJ2DTi4jllXdFtJpx1xnw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
The sign for
"The Annexe" is blurred but you can see it.  If "Number 39" were intended
to be a house number they'd have put
"39" and "39A" on the signs.  Fewer letters so lower cost for the two signs.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180802/45eb9c0a/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list