[Talk-ca] [Talk-us] "Highway X" and the like as names

Sun Jan 23 05:56:44 UTC 2022

+1. But that doesn't answer the problem what name to place in name=.

Let's take one actual example from experience, Highway 779. North and south
of Stony Plain (where it's referred to as 48 Street, both on signs and
addresses), it's locally posted (in both Parkland County and Sturgeon
County) as Range Road 10 (as being in the Fifth Meridian of the Dominion
survey where the range numbering resets west), but addresses generally use
the name "Highway 779" or "Secondary Highway 779", and it's also referred
as such when giving directions. From that, that would mean restoring the
name Highway 779 that was previously in the map, and there's the question
of which name should be placed on name=. A similar situation also happens
with other highways within my area, Highway 16A (named Parkland Highway,
but both signs, addresses and local reference simply call it by number) and
Highway 60 (named Devonian Way, and also carries 2 range road numbers on
each side of the North Saskatchewan, but it's more commonly known by
number).

My additional thoughts here, I just looked up Geobase Roads for my area
through JOSM, and the names for highways and grid roads outside of cities
and towns tend to match those used by addresses on the ground, except the
Yellowhead which is named there as TCH. And also of interest is Highway 2
from Calgary to Edmonton city limits; it's most commonly referred to as QE2
but in Geobase, it's named just as "2 Highway" [sic]. Rest of the highway
goes by that and that may also force a restoration of the "Highway 2" name
on the sections named the NWWR (I don't know if Northern Alberta locals are
using that name in directions if ever).

Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2022 23:10:15 -0500
> From: Jarek Pi?rkowski <jarek at piorkowski.ca>
> Cc: talk-ca <talk-ca at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] "Highway X" and the like as names
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CACV3h2n-hUAn4GS+j6f8QGn8jqdsj9ZygfY_9dQhzyrOD8mZnw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> A thought:
>
> In OSM usage, road name and mailing address tend to be coupled quite
> heavily, but just a reminder that is not necessarily the case in real
> world. Particularly with rural addresses, "mailing" (Canada Post) addresses
> can be quite different than any posted or used road names.
> Building/property address (what's tagged in addr:*) should probably be
> determined as an answer to a question similar to "what would be entered by
> an owner or resident to search for a location".
>
> Complicating the matter is the fact that in Canada, Canada Post's addresses
> are considered by Canada Post to be proprietary business information. OSM
> might never be a complete database of mailing addresses (consider also
> postal codes) - unless Canada Post changes their licensing, this will have
> to be okay, and it shouldn't stop us from trying to have names for every
> road that has a name.
>
> --Jarek
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 22:53 Jherome Miguel <jheromemiguel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I may fall back on using "Highway X" or something similar when it's
> > predominantly or consistently used across the stretch of road within the
> > same municipality or another where the highway runs, but there are some
> > instances addresses within the same municipality or another along the
> same
> > numbered highway may use another road name. For example, one property
> will
> > use "Highway X" on their address while another property nearby or further
> > down the road (within the same municipality or another) uses "Range Road
> > XX" or something like that. Another issue is with the naming of
> > service/frontage roads ("service road" common usage in Alberta), but
> that's
> > another story and may be complex as they may have their own names (e.g.
> > Highway 16A service roads in Spruce Grove and Acheson, and Yellowhead
> > service roads in Edmonton, many of which are pre-existing roads or grid
> > roads).
> >
> > Also an additional thought, this issue may also apply to grid roads as
> > well, as they may get prominent names often posted in advance at highway
> > intersections, but in many cases addresses will be using the grid road
> > number (either based on city/town grid or Alberta/Dominion survey grid).
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 8:02 PM john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> So in your example of a house address I personally would fall back on
> the
> >> official Canada Post mailing address and use that highway name for the
> name
> >> or is that too simple?
> >>
> >> Cheerio John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022, 9:46 PM Jherome Miguel, <jheromemiguel at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I?m talking about predominant usage to record in the name=* tag, which
> >>> can be uncertain, and you might want a name that should be the most
> useful
> >>> for the most data users. In this situation, you got some name in
> addition
> >>> to "Highway X". Sometimes, those names are commonly used (e.g.
> >>> Trans-Canada, QE2, Yellowhead, Anthony Henday), and in others, its
> just the
> >>> number (as in my local examples; the road has name[s] but is more
> commonly
> >>> referred to by number). The name is on signs at intersections,
> interchanges
> >>> or on-/off-ramps or the trailblazer at about every 20 km, but locals
> will
> >>> use the highway number for directions or rural addressing. I did
> replace
> >>> cases of "Highway X" across Alberta, but the address signs may say
> >>> something as "1234 Highway X", and/or the locals will use the highway
> >>> number for wayfinding.
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> > Talk-ca mailing list
> > Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20220122/e869f828/attachment.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Talk-ca Digest, Vol 167, Issue 8
> ***************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20220122/e512c2c6/attachment.htm>