[Talk-GB] Street-name toids

[Nick]

UPRNs are applied to street records (e.g. 320276457 is a street record 
in Fife, I am sure there are many more).

Perhaps all these non-addressable UPRNs should be identified as part of 
the open data?

Related to this is the FOI request that Robert Whittaker made re "list 
of all UPRNs that are classified as 'historic', and a separate list of 
all those classified as a 'parent',,  " - see the ongoing battle 
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/lists_of_historic_and_parent_upr

On 12/08/2020 20:36, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>
> On 12/08/2020 16:54, SK53 wrote:
>> OpenRoads from the Ordnance Survey contains a field containing the 
>> toid for the street name. I wonder if we should include these 
>> alongside usrn & uprn. They may be more useful than either for 
>> gathering complex roads which share a name.
>>
>> Experimentally I have added this 
>> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/836343813> toid to a street in 
>> Glossop.
>
> I think adding toids is worth it, if we can unambiguously link them.
>
> However, I'm a little concerned that someone has added a UPRN to that 
> way. UPRNs are not, generally, applied to streets, and looking at the 
> ESRI satellite view I suspect that that's actually a legacy UPRN which 
> applied to the property before it was redeveloped for housing.
>
> The street does have a USRN, which is 17326392. If you compare this:
>
> https://uprn.uk/usrn/17326392
>
> which is Foundry Close, with this:
>
> https://uprn.uk/usrn/17301086
>
> which is Surrey Street (that Foundry Close connects to), you'll see on 
> the latter a single UPRN on top of Foundry Close. But switch to the 
> satellite view on that page and you'll see that it's appears to be the 
> UPRN of what was, at the time the image was taken, some empty land 
> that had been cleared for redevelopment.
>
> Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb