[Talk-GB] Non-intuitive addresses

[Colin Smale]

> On 02/12/2022 10:17 PM Andrew Hain <andrewhainosm at hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> 
> I remain unconvinced that the road is called Boat Lane at all. When OS Opendata was first released a quite unfamiliar spelling of a road near where I was brought up was copied into OSM; in this case the discrepancy with the addresses is a red flag against the accuracy of OS products.
> 
The OS are not the owners of this data - it is passed to them from the National Gazetteer and other authoritative sources. If the OS give you bad data, it may be a case of garbage in, garbage out. To get it fixed, the local highways authority is the place to start; any changes will filter through to the OS in due course. Sometimes road signs are wrong...

As to whether the road is "called" Boat Lane: By whom? Again, that question should be directed initially at the highways authority, who feed into the Gazetteer.

> --
> Andrew
> 
> ---------------------------------------------
> From: Mark Goodge <mark at good-stuff.co.uk>
> Sent: 12 February 2022 17:48
> To: Talk GB <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Non-intuitive addresses
> 
> 
> 
> On 12/02/2022 17:21, Colin Smale wrote:
> >> On 02/12/2022 5:44 PM Mark Goodge <mark at good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> In this particular case, Abbots Walk is not a substreet or, in
> >> Royal Mail terms, a dependent thoroughfare. It *is* the street name
> >> (or, in RM terms, thoroughfare) in the address, despite the fact
> >> that the houses actually face onto a street with a different name.
> >>
> > The postal addresses of these premises (1-4 Abbots Walk, and 1-2
> > Ferry Cottages, Abbots Walk) are pretty clear to me as they are to
> > RM. Other types of address label these properties differently, but if
> > we stick to the paradigm that "addr:* is for *postal* addresses, why
> > the discussion? Or are we making life difficult by creating
> > exceptions and special cases?
> 
> In this particular case, I don't think there is any real difficulty as
> far as the building addresses are concerned. It's the name of the street
> which is the issue here, and, since there is an open data source for the
> correct name, I don't see any problem with changing it in OSM. My real
> concern here is how best to ensure that the ensuing mismatch between
> postal address and street name is not wrongly interpreted as an error,
> and reverted back to the wrong name by someone who mistakenly thinks
> they are fixing it. Plus, there's the secondary question of how to map
> the name of the block, which is about labelling rather than addressing.
> But, again, that's not really a major problem.
> 
> I'm more concerned about the Huxleys Way addresses, where I know that
> they are currently wrongly tagged but I have no open data or
> on-the-ground source to cite in support of any changes I make. That's
> why I'm interested in how other mappers have dealt with the same problem
> when they've encountered it elsewhere.
> 
> Mark
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220212/bc5d70f5/attachment-0001.htm>