[Tagging] Use of the name=* on features internal to named areas

[Joseph Eisenberg]

> RE:  feature named 'Smith Fountain' within 'XYZ Park' should be tagged
'name=Smith Fountain' but not 'name=XYZ Park Smith Fountain'.
Yes, that is good advice>

> RE: "Internal features to a named area should only be tagged with a name
when there is some verifiable indication (such as signage) of the feature's
name independent of the enclosing area."

Signage is not required for a toponym to exist. Most natural features, like
woods, wetlands, lakes, do not have signs with their names. In many
countries with weaker governments or lower literacy levels, the names of
hamlets and streets will not be written down, but can be verified by
asking the local people. Similarly it is acceptable to add the
commonly-used name for a fountain in a university if that name is known
widely, even if there is no sign. So I would suggest shortening this
suggestion and focusing on the existence of a specific "commonly-used local
name".

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 7:52 AM Brian M. Sperlongano <zelonewolf at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I recently became aware of a tagging dispute[1] regarding the use of the
> name=* tag on features within a college[2] in Maryland, USA.  On review of
> the wiki, I found the documentation did not directly address this type of
> situation.  Since we're talking about a tag with 80M usages and a tagging
> dispute, I figured this warranted discussion.
>
> The tagging in question is constructing name=* tags for features within
> the college, using the college's name prepended.  For example, the tennis
> courts are labelled "CCBC Tennis Court #1", "CCBC Tennis Court #2", etc.
> The section of the campus that has the athletic fields is tagged
> landuse=recreation_ground and named "CCBC Recreation Area".  There is also
> a "CCBC Main Score Board" next to the baseball field, a "CCBC Pitching
> Cage", and even a "CCBC Flower Garden".
>
> The wiki article "Names" has a section[3] titled "Names are not for
> descriptions" which has only a limited discussion of this concept, e.g. "it
> is completely sufficient to tag building=house, it is wrong to add also
> name=house."
>
> I would recommend adding a paragraph to that article that reads something
> like:
>
> Do not construct names for features by combining the name of an enclosing
> feature with a description.  For example, an unnamed fountain in XYZ Park
> should not be tagged with 'name=XYZ Park Fountain'.  Internal features to a
> named area should only be tagged with a name when there is some verifiable
> indication (such as signage) of the feature's name independent of the
> enclosing area.  When the internal feature is named, it should still not be
> combined with the enclosing area's name.  A feature named 'Smith Fountain'
> within 'XYZ Park' should be tagged 'name=Smith Fountain' but not 'name=XYZ
> Park Smith Fountain'.
>
> Is that an accurate description of our customs and conventions for name=*
> tags?
>
> [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95882458
> [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/158082404
> [3]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201231/f2deff20/attachment.htm>