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

Michael Collinson mike at ayeltd.biz
Fri May 23 16:24:22 UTC 2014


On 15/05/2014 09:27, Steven Horner wrote:
>
> 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.
>
C19th Terraces are interesting ... and confusing.  I've studied a few in 
my home town of Otley. Generally I've found that when the developer, 
usually a factory owner,  put both the street and the building in, then 
"Danefield Terrace" is typically the name of the street. But if they put 
the buildings up later, then the name refers to the building, for 
example Elm Terrace, East Busk Lane ... even though it has a street sign 
and local folks will refer to it just as Elm Terrace. So I put the 
Terrace name on the building.  And, by the way, it will often have an 
alley around the back referred to as Back of Elm Terrace.  And yes there 
is one case where the street sign makers just gave up and put both 
names. Ramsey Terrace/Wharfe Street. There is a terrace on the left and 
detached houses and an old school on the right. I've not found enough 
historic information or talked to folks living there to determine 
whether it is a double name street or Wharfe Street with a terrace down 
one side.

The point in rambling/writing is that I suspect these were all 
non-issues, nobody cared, until the advent of digital computers and the 
need to assign things precisely ... even though the reality is that they 
are not precise. Nineteenth century OS surveyors clearly dodge the 
issue. A beck or wood will have one name on one part and another name on 
another, but no attempt to decide a boundary.  So, like it or not we are 
not just collecting names of things, in some instances we (and public 
bodies faced with the same issue) are actually transfer naming things.  
In the case of public bodies, there can then be a clash between the 
logical assignment of a name and what local people feel something is 
called.  Perhaps many double named streets actually don't have a name at 
all 'cos if you live there it isn't important. But I am venturing into 
Tim Water's realm. Fun though, even though this does not help Steven in 
the slightest. Sorry!

Mike

PS I cannot resist one more interesting example. If you map in the north 
of England, you will be no doubt putting names like "Heber Gill" on 
streams. But I believe, perhaps someone more knowledgeable can confirm, 
that gill does not refer to the water at all, but a stretch of steep 
narrow valley that the stream passes through in part of its journey.



More information about the Talk-GB mailing list