[Talk-us] Directional Prefix/Postfix Proposal
kevin at atkinson.dhs.org
Sun Aug 1 04:05:10 BST 2010
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> On 1 August 2010 03:54, Kevin Atkinson <kevin at atkinson.dhs.org> wrote:
>> 1) An exception to the abbreviation rule for directional indicators
>> with the fully expanded name going into "alt_name"
> First I'd like to oppose making exceptions from the global rules in
> local rules. The global rules are vague enough that there's always
> some space to express all that is needed by further specifying the
> (Note that in the end there's no official local or global rules..
> question you asked at the end of your mail. So in the end many people
> will try to learn the scheme by looking at the map data around them,
> or by doing what seems logical. This does not mean that there
> shouldn't be any rules, but it does mean that they need to be rather
The WIKI page, Key:name, says in no uncertain words "Do not abbreviate
words", its even in bold. Based on this rule people have been going
around systematically expanding all abbreviations in the United States, and
since the official policy says not to abbreviate, its pretty hard to argue
with their actions.
To avoid this either:
1) A clear exception needs to be made
2) The official rule need to be toned down.
>> I propose an exception to the abbreviation rule be made for directional
>> indicators. 'North, 'South', 'East', and 'West' when a directional
>> indicator (and not part of the street name) shall be abbreviated 'N.', 'S.',
>> 'E.', and 'W.' (with a period, will explain why below), and Northeast,
>> Southeast, Northwest, Southwest shall be abbreviated as 'NW', 'SW', 'SE',
>> and 'NW' (without any periods). The fully expanded name may be included in
> You can make up a new tag, like full_name, or alt_spelling, there's no
> limitation on this. I feel that alt_name should probably be left for
> actual alternative names.
OK, if I go with "full_name" will the name finder be able to use it.
>> 3) Spelling out the prefix can lead to ambiguous situations where it is
>> unclear if the prefix is part of the street name (vid the kid gave several
>> examples in his web page)
> But you later propose the "included" thing which removes this ambiguity.
Yes that is true, but that flag might not always be used consistently,
especially since it does not affect rendering.
More information about the Talk-us