[Talk-GB] [Talk-scotland] Tagging of roads with adjacent named terraces

[Donald Noble]

Peter, Ken,
Thanks for the feedback. I completely agree with using street/parentstreet
for the addresses, and have tried to do this where appropriate following
the recent discussions on talk-gb. I will also update the addresses on
Leopold Place to include parentstreet=London Road when I make any changes
following this discussion.

However the question I have is more how should we tag the road? I would say
it is unambiguously called London Road and happens to have a set of
buildings on one side called Leopold Place. I think the original tagging of
name=London Road, name:left=Leopold Place, is correct. But is there a good
way to show/represent on the map more clearly that there is a set of
buildings called Leopold Place?

Cheers, Donald



On Sat, 7 May 2022 at 18:35, Peter Neale <nealepb at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> A quick scan of a street imagery app (that I won't name) shows a name
> board for a restaurant.  The website of that restaurant shows it address as
> "20 Leopold Place, Edinburgh..."
>
> So, should it be "addr:street=Leopold Place"; "addr:parentstreet=London
> Road"?
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
> (PeterPan99)
>
>
> On Saturday, 7 May 2022, 17:51:33 BST, Donald Noble <drnoble at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for the opinion Robert, good to hear your thoughts. The question is
> what would you tag? There is not a single outline, but rather 9 separate
> buildings that together make up Leopold Place, plus there are 18 address
> nodes too. Combining these into a single item would lose detail, and the
> wiki page on buildings explicitly suggests mapping each house in a
> terrace. Naming each building separately also seems wrong. Perhaps a
> surrounding landuse=residential area?
>
> Cheers, Donald
>
> On Sat, 7 May 2022 at 17:13, Robert Weetman <robert.wtman.88 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Not sure if it helps to add this kind of response, but I'm going to
> anyway...
>
> It feels instinctively to me to be that the obvious tagging should be with
> Leopold Place as a building name. I imagine this causing issues with actual
> maps, but we're going to face this issue anyway. And we should fall back on
> the rule about not tagging for any particular rendering.
>
> I guess there's no harm in the addr:substreet addition too.
>
> Just my twopennethworth as they say.
>
> Robert
>
>
> On Sat, 7 May 2022, 16:31 Donald Noble, <drnoble at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Alan,
> As I understood addr:substreet was more in conjunction with address nodes
> on buildings, not tagging the road ways, as this loses the spatial
> placement and doesn't work when both sides of a road have different names
> buildings/terraces. I suppose we could go with addr:substreet:left and
> :right, but I am not sure this is helpful.
>
> Donald
>
> On Sat, 7 May 2022 at 16:03, Alan Mackie <aamackie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think in recent discussions the preference was for these addresses to be
> tagged `addr:substreet`, as in a level of addressing "below" street level
> in the hierarchy. The building names themselves can also be applied to the
> buildings with the usual tags.
>
> Sorry for the double response, forgot to reply all.
>
> On Sat, 7 May 2022, 14:51 Donald Noble, <drnoble at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Just wondering if there is any consensus/guidance on tagging of streets
> with adjacent named buildings/terraces. There are quite a few of these in
> Scotland, and until now these have been tagged with the main name of the
> road, and name:left/name:right as appropriate for the building/terrace name.
>
> Recently a mapper has changed a couple of these so the (minor) name
> appears on the map, and they do not appear to be local. Before reverting
> this, I just wanted to reach out to the wider community.
>
> This road is called London Road, but the buildings to the north are called
> Leopold Place, see https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=932836447528898
> which shows both signs (although a bit blurry)
> GinaroZ left a note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3087279 regarding
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116967047
>
> Thanks for your thoughts on this,
> Cheers, Donald
>
> --
> Donald Noble
> http://drnoble.co.uk
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
>
> --
> Donald Noble
> http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-scotland mailing list
> Talk-scotland at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-scotland
>
>
>
> --
> Donald Noble
> http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>


-- 
Donald Noble
http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20220507/24d9abf6/attachment-0001.htm>