[Talk-us-massachusetts] Named Major Roads

[Greg Troxel]

"Alan & Ruth Bragg" <alan.ruth.bragg at gmail.com> writes:

> What are we to do about state highways that have names like "Grand Army of
> the Republic" , "Cranberry Highway".
> The MAD address for buildings on these roads are Route 6 and Route 6A.
> I propose changing the name= to an alt_name= and assigning the  MAD name to
> name=
> Travelling to the cape I think I would be looking for directional signs
> saying "Route 6A", I don't think I'd find a lot saying "Cranberry Highway"

I think we need to tread very lightly -- much more so than that -- in
terms of "fixing" OSM to match MAD.  I am actually surprised at MAD
having "Route 6A" in the name field; that is simply not the name, but a
reference.  Not only that, but it's a US Highway, so it should be "US
6", not "Route 6", which I would view as outright wrong for a name (even
if a ref in a name were ok).  And it's very longstanding
widely-practiced tradition in OSM to have the actual name in name, even
if it's not used much, and to have the authority and the number in the
ref tag -- which I'm 99.9% sure are like that (ref="US 6", in this
case).  

So I am strongly opposed to such a change.  And I am pretty sure that if
it were run by the imports list, there would be objections.

I think instead, we should allow a point to pass QA if we can match the
name to a ref= tag on a nearby road.

If a data consumer can't cope with an address that's got one name in the
road field, and the nearby road has an actual name and a ref, then that
data consumer is buggy and should be fixed.  Really, if there is a node
or way with addr: tags that match the address being looked for, it
should be found, regardless of anything about roads.  We are only doing
matching to find things that are missing on the map or that don't match
our initial mental model that address points and roads must always match
exactly.  We're finding that usually they do, but they don't always.  If
that's how the world is, that's how it is.  I think we only need to be
sure we aren't doing something odd without understanding.

Regarding your routing comment, you are right that the ref is very
helpful, but OSMAnd for example says things like "MA 2 Concord Turnpike"
to describe the road.  I've been listening to that for years now, and
it's interesting that sometimes the signs have the highway number and
sometimes they have the name, and sometimes locals use or the other.

The whole issue of what the right name is, and what ought to be in
addresses, is pretty interesting and complicated.  Probably that merits
a query to that town's road name and address authority.

> Interestingly, buildings along Route 2 from Alewife to Concord have MAD
> addresses of "Concord Turnpike" and "Cambridge Turnpike"

That's the New England tradition of changing the road name at the
boundary :-) And you'll find some with Elm Street, and other names.

So I guess my biggest surprise is "Route 6" being in the MAD -- that
really seems bizarre.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 162 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us-massachusetts/attachments/20180818/17b51f48/attachment.sig>