[Talk-GB] OSM Analysis updated with May 2014 OS Locator data
osm at raggedred.net
Sun May 18 11:32:28 UTC 2014
I'd go for not:name, because the abbreviation is not the real name and it is the convention established soon after the OS Opendata was released.
Where OS suddenly get these strange names from seems odd to me. It's almost as though they want their Opendata to be hard to use.
osm user, chillly
On 18 May 2014 11:52:38 GMT+01:00, Donald Noble <drnoble at gmail.com> wrote:
>Has anyone else noticed that the Ordnance Survey seem to be including
>more abbreviations in their Locator names, such as Gdns. and Cres.
>which flag up as errors when compared to the full names in OSM?
>Is it best practice to include these as alt_name or not:name on the
>OSM way? I have mainly been doing the latter, as they are not named
>with the abbreviation, but perhaps it make more sense to call the
>abbreviation an alternative spelling.
>On 13 May 2014 14:24, 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.
>> Shaun McDonald
>> ITO World
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-GB