[Talk-GB] Tagging post towns and other addressing issues in the UK

Andrzej ndrw6 at redhazel.co.uk
Wed Jan 30 22:24:53 UTC 2019

Thank you for the discussion so far. I've been thinking about a solution for tagging localities that would work for both mappers who want to tag locality types and those who don't. Current proposals (addr:town|village and addr:locality|sublocality) are two distinct and incompatible tagging schemes so reaching a consensus may be impossible. 

How about tagging localities as addr:locality|sublocality _and_ addr:locality|sublocality:type=city|town|suburb|village|hamlet|campus, so they can be added separately and at different times? 

Best regards,

On 28 January 2019 04:40:26 GMT+08:00, Andrzej <ndrw6 at redhazel.co.uk> wrote:
>When working on post codes in East Anglia I realised the current
>address tagging scheme is insufficient for even fairly basic scenarios.
>I have already discussed the issues with some of the most experienced
>mappers and like to bring these issues to your attention. Robert has
>summarised his ideas in
>The bottom line is, I would like to be tag commonly used addresses
>without losing information and without resorting to addr:full. 
>1. Post towns (most pressing one because there is a lot of confusion
>around it). The UK is fairly unique in that not every town is a post
>town. This makes it impossible to tag e.g. Station Road, Histon,
>Cambridge CB24 9LF. 
>Wiki recommends addr:city to be used for tagging post towns (Cambridge)
>but then how do we tag Histon? 
>- Robert recommends sticking to the current meaning of addr:city and
>using addr:town and addr:village for town and village names, which,
>although not in wiki, are already being used in the UK. I like this
>solution because it is very explicit in what each addr: key means and
>it doesn't redefine addr:city. 
>- SK53 prefers using addr:city for everything (towns, even villages)
>and either not tagging post towns (they can be seen as a an internal
>detail of a closed Royal Mail database) or using a new tag for it, like
>addr:post_town. It is a simple solution, results in Histon being called
>Histon and not Cambridge (without introducing new tags for town and
>village names) and is commonly used. It is also a bit confusing (what
>exactly is a city?) and I think we we should at least support tagging
>post towns. 
>Key questions:
>a) addr:city for post towns or towns and villages? 
>b) how to rag remaining information (respectively, towns and villages
>or post towns,) 
>2. Tagging addresses within campuses, business parks etc. There is
>addr:place but it is supposed to be used instead of addr:street. Again,
>Robert has a fairly decent proposal for that using addr:place or
>addr:locality and addr:parentstreet. Please comment. 
>2a. should buildings in campuses be tagged with
>addr:buildingnumber/name or addr:unit? I would prefer
>buildingname/number (as they are often subdivided) but these seem to be
>associated with addr:street. 
>3. Similar to (2) but for buildings. Tagging buildings that have e.g. a
>single name but multiple house numbers? 
>Best regards, 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20190131/6d3a8726/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list