[Talk-us] Directional Prefix/Postfix Proposal

Kevin Atkinson kevin at atkinson.dhs.org
Mon Aug 2 18:42:08 BST 2010

On Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:

> On 31 Jul 2010, at 21:58 , Kevin Atkinson wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Val Kartchner wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2010-07-31 at 21:31 -0600, Kevin Atkinson wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Val Kartchner wrote:
>>>>> 1) I agree with most of your proposal.
>>>>> a) Your proposal doesn't take into account cases where there is both a
>>>>>    name and a numeric designation for a street.  An instance in Ogden,
>>>>>    Utah is "Washington Boulevard" and its alias "400 East".
>>>> In both cases doesn't a directional prefix apply.
>>>> However, to avoid ambiguity with the "_prefix" tag.  How about this rule.
>>>> The "_prefix" and "_suffix" apply to all name tags.  Hence if name_1 is
>>>> "400 East" than name_1_prefix shall be "S", etc.
>>> So, you're also proposing that the additional name(s) be placed in
>>> "name_1", etc.
>> No.  I'm saying _if_ the name is places in name_1 than use name_1_prefix, if it is placed in alt_name, use alt_name_prefix, etc.
> alt_name has a specific meaning and shouldn't be used for this. also name_1,2 … was used for Tiger with the same purpose as alt_name.
> Now if you play around with prefeix, postfix, abbrev or expanded name it's better to use a different tag osm strength is to make this easy. So no reason to overload existing well defined tags with info which doesn't belong there and creates even more confusion.

Hu?  Did you mean to refer to this:

   5) The fully expanded name may be included using the "alt_name" tag to
   aid those searching for an address.

More information about the Talk-us mailing list