[Tagging] addr:street for routes

Shawn K. Quinn skquinn at rushpost.com
Sun Aug 2 05:45:25 UTC 2020


On 8/1/20 12:02, Paul Johnson wrote:
> For the way:
> 
> name=Humble-Huffman Road
> ref=FM 1960

Oops. I got the name wrong, it's Humble Westfield Road, and it only
exists in OSM data because I haven't yet surveyed to be sure it's not
signed.

I'm pretty sure none of the current signs use this name. The "name" on
the green signs is FM 1960 (not sure if they have "East" on them, but
the addresses do use this directional).

> For the address:
> addr:street=FM 1960 East

That we can agree on.

[my original message:]
>> I'm on the side that name=* should match what's in addr:street=*, even
>> if there's some duplicity, but maybe there should be some other tag to
>> say perhaps the name shouldn't be rendered on (most) visual maps and/or
>> read out separately from the ref in navigation software.

> Problem is, that does not necessarily match the ground truth.  In
> reality, a lot of addresses have a street name that radically departs
> from what the street is signposted as, particularly if the street is
> part of a numbered route.  It's common because there's only so much
> you can cram on an envelope and it's often shorter and easier to
> scrawl out "Hwy 12" instead of the street name than whatever the
> highway department named it.

Drawing from my prior experience as a messenger/courier, there were very
few situations where the address I was expected to deliver to did not
match the name on the sign. There were a couple of oddball situations
such as a couple of addresses off of FM 1960 West (now Cypress Creek
Parkway) where the building itself was far enough from the road to make
finding it difficult if you didn't know where to look (for the curious,
they are 4550 and 4606 among others). The most egregious examples come
where there's a complete lack of signage (county roads in Brazoria
County being the one that sticks out the most), but again, it's more of
there just not being an actual signed name versus a name that doesn't
match the sign.

It may well be different in greater Houston versus Oklahoma, upstate New
York, etc.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn at rushpost.com>
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com



More information about the Tagging mailing list