[Talk-GB] Non-intuitive addresses

[Sarah Hoffmann]

On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 09:38:11PM +0100, Colin Smale wrote:
> > On 02/12/2022 8:29 PM Tom Crocker <tomcrockermail at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Sat, 12 Feb 2022, 17:34 Paul Berry, <pmberry2007 at gmail.com mailto:pmberry2007 at gmail.com > wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Mark,
> > > 
> > > I'd map that as:
> > > 
> > > addr:street=Abbots Walk
> > > addr:parentstreet=Boat Lane
> > > 
> > > I'm not hung up on Abbots Walk being a building rather than a street. We're fitting addressing to the best available tags, not the other way around.
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > Paul
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > Hi Paul
> > 
> > For what it's worth, I'm inclined to agree that having only one tag would be ideal. The reason I'd go with addr:place is various tools like nominatim won't use the address if addr:street doesn't match a highway. So we'll tag it but it won't show up in search results, which seems a bit self-defeating.
> > 
> This sounds like "tagging for the renderer"... And addr:place in particular was rather frowned upon in the discussion in December 2020...

It was frowned upon when abused as a replacement for suburb. This
particual case is exactly what addr:place was meant for: a case where you want
to make it very clear that the housenumber does not refer to the street
in front of the house but something else.

So by all means use addr:place=Abbots Walk here and leave out the
addr:street. It's not only making the geocoder happy but also serves as
a useful cue for the next mapper that something unusual is going on
with the address here.

Sarah