[Talk-GB] OSM Analysis updated with May 2014 OS Locator data

Wed May 14 11:07:08 UTC 2014

There are at least two major streets in the middle of
Nottingham<http://osm.org/go/eu8Y~fqF2?layers=N>like this: logically
the street does not have a name, the sides of the
street have names:

   - North of the Council House, the S side is Smith Row, the N side is
   Long Row
   - South of the Council House, the S side is Poultry, the N side
   Cheapside (originally Rotten Row)

These names originate as locations in the market square, as can be seen by
other survivals such as Beastmarket Hill. Where the square is now an open
plaza the name of the rows of buildings have been transferred to the
thoroughfare. The addresses on Cheapside are even more complex because the
shops also have entrances in Exchange Arcade and are let as units of this
shopping arcade. The Austin Reed shop appears to have at least 4 addresses
from the Royal Mail, OS, Nottingham council & Austin Reed website: all in
all a mess.

Other places where this occurs include: Sherwin Road/Castle
Boulevard<http://osm.org/go/eu8Y2Tvhr?layers=N>,
where the W end of Sherwin Road has houses with Castle Boulevard addresses
on the S side. In this case I resolved it by tagging the footpath with the
Caste Boulevard name. This discrepancy arose because the two roads were
merged when the roundabout was built in the 1920s.

I recently noticed a case where the Land Registry data for a small new
build terrace had been resolved by using the name of the terrace as a
building name. Fail. In some towns (Bangor, N. Wales, comes to mind) many
houses were built as named terraces with numbers within the terrace.
Although Bangor has been relatively recently house-numbered a simple
inspection of addresses painted on rubbish bins suggests that the original
addresses are still in use.

Broadly speaking we should try and do this better than the OS Open Data
because it does happen fairly frequently. name:left and name:right can be
used even if no-one consumes them at present. It is useful to try and map
addresses in such cases, and these are the one case where I am happy to use
the associatedStreet relation. This at least enables the correct grouping
of entities for the 'street'.

Perhaps the challenge is twofold:

   - Persuading people that streets with addresses might not be named. (The
   Royal Mail seems generally to adopt a Procrustean solution to force
   everything to fit PAF).
   - Working out how to consume such data (mainly for rendering).

Jerry

On 14 May 2014 10:07, Richard Mann <richard.mann.westoxford at gmail.com>wrote:

> There's one like that in Oxford (for about 30 metres) - street addresses
> different on the two sides. For the moment it has name="St Clements
> Street", alt_name="London Place", and a separate footway with name="London
> Place" (plus a name:note).
>
> So my suggestion - draw separate footways, and give them names. Use
> name/alt_name on the road, or name = "one name / other name" if both seem
> equally valid.
>
> Richard
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Steven Horner <steven at stevenhorner.com>wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> It's interesting and highlights a few problems local to me, some I had
>> buried my head in the sand temporarily because I don't know how to fix them
>> correctly. My biggest problem when tagging roads is what to name a road
>> when either side of the road is a different street. For instance the
>> analysis highlights "Myrtle Grove" as missing here:
>> http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/map_browser?bbox=415474,536751,415809,537148&referrer=area
>>
>> Myrtle grove is the South side of the road labeled Chestnut Grove and
>> continues around to where the Road is labeled Elm Gardens. Almost all of
>> the streets in the estate are like this, where it is very misleading
>> because opposite sides of the road is a different named street. How should
>> this be mapped, I have steered clear of fixing it because I couldn't find
>> any guidance on how it should be labeled and technically is it even wrong.
>> The actual building footprints I have added the correct addresses to.
>>
>> I use various OS products in my day job and interestingly OSM labels the
>> streets exactly the same as Vectormap Local does, anyone looking at either
>> OS or OSM maps would not be able to find Myrtle Grove. Another street where
>> I have always though was labeled wrong in the village is Roddymoor Road,
>> there is no street sign and I have near heard anyone refer to it as this.
>> The street on part of this road is not labeled (buildings are) it is East
>> Terrace and that's how anyone describing it or looking at signs would
>> describe it. Again OS do this the same which is probably why OSM has it
>> tagged like this.
>>
>> All of this highlights that while OS Locator may have a difference and is
>> fantastic for finding potential problems, changing it so OS Locator
>> comparisons are 100% may not be the correct solution?
>>
>> Any help appreciated and apologies if I should ask in a different list,
>> surely this is an incredibly common problem that I have somehow missed the
>> obvious solution to.
>>
>> regards,
>> Steven
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Shaun McDonald <
>> shaun at shaunmcdonald.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> ITO’s OSM Analysis has been updated with the latest OS Locator data.
>>> Most places have dropped out of the 100% completeness compared to OS
>>> Locator. There’s now 18 places which have less than 95% completeness.
>>>
>>> http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main
>>>
>>> Shaun McDonald
>>> Developer
>>> ITO World
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.stevenhorner.com  <http://www.stevenhorner.com>
>>  @stevenhorner <http://twitter.com/stevenhorner>
>>  0191 645 2265
>>  stevenhorner
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20140514/074288a7/attachment-0001.html>