[talk-au] Consistent addr:state format?

[Kim Oldfield]

Hi,

Is there any advantage to tagging addresses with the state when the 
state is already well defined in OSM and the state for a given address 
location can be obtained from existing map data?

I'm not criticising Justin's work - improved consistency is good. I'm 
asking the open ended question: is there a better way of recording this 
data that avoids duplication?

Regards,
Kim

On 29/1/22 23:56, tabjsina wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm new to this mailing list (and mailing lists in general), apologies 
> if I'm doing it wrong :)
>
> I've recently made a maproulette challenge which asked users to 
> confirm updating any populating addr:state value in Western Australia 
> to "WA", if it was something else. Previously, about 90% were already 
> "WA", 9% were a variation like "Western Australia", "wa" (lowercase), 
> and the remaining were something completely wrong, like "AU" or a 
> suburb/city name.
>
> Now that WA is all fixed, I was looking at other states, and noticed 
> that, while most states also had a similar 90% rate of using acronym, 
> NSW and moreso VIC had a closer split between the acronym and the full 
> name.
>
> Before I go ahead with setting up this maproulette challenge for the 
> rest of the country, I wanted to get some thoughts on whether it makes 
> sense to standardize around using acronyms (WA, ACT, NSW, NT, QLD, 
> VIC, SA, TAS), full name (Western Australia, Australian Capital 
> Territory, etc), or whether we should not be trying to standardise 
> this value at all.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au