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

Thu May 15 07:46:37 UTC 2014

Left and right is decided by the direction of the osm-way. Not by
east/west/north/south.

BTW, in Brussels we have streets with 4 official names : left/right,
French/Dutch :-)

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Steven Horner <steven at stevenhorner.com>wrote:

> Thank you all for the advice, although it may have confused me all the
> more with different suggestions.
>
> Personally I like Marc's suggestion of using the 2 street names separated
> by a hyphen. This allows both names to be rendered. Then identifying each
> street with left and right tags. How do you chose which is which if the
> road runs East to West?
>
> I'm amazed this doesn't crop up constantly, any old terraced streets with
> a road separating them would have the issue. I can think of about a dozen
> streets within 1 mile of me where this is the case.
>
> I will do some more investigation and look at several different mapped
> areas to see how they have been tagged, doesn't sound like there is a
> definitive answer.
>
> Regards,
> Steven
> On 15 May 2014 08:01, "Marc Gemis" <marc.gemis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Let me first introduce myself, I'm a Belgian mapper that has been lurking
>> for a few months on this mailing list. The reason is that I want to learn
>> how other communities work and which problems they have and how they solve
>> them.
>>
>> Now back to the topic: in Belgium it's quite common to have streets with
>> two names, at least when they are on the border of two villages. The
>> Belgian community decided to map this as follows:
>> name =  name1 -  name2
>> name:left = name1
>> name:right = name2
>>
>> An example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/207455046
>>
>> What are your thoughts about this ?
>>
>> regards
>>
>> m
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:07 PM, SK53 <sk53.osm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20140515/d2d1719f/attachment-0001.html>