[Talk-us] Address Standard

[Kevin Atkinson]

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010, Dale Puch wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Kevin Atkinson <kevin at atkinson.dhs.org>wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Aug 2010, Dale Puch wrote:
>>
>>  The directional prefix/suffix absolutely should not be dropped from any
>>> streets.  Even ones that are simple straight lines that change N/S or E/W
>>> at
>>> a point along it.  Treat them as 2 different streets.
>>>
>>
>> 1) Why?

> Because your losing information.

I am not advocating complete removal.  Just separating into another tag.

> If your separating the elements to different tags...  if truly not part of
> the name, it can be used for part of the address instead of street.
> Is it really not part of the street name, what are the rules you use to
> determine it is only part of the address?

I thought I already made those clear.  But here they are:

1) The directional prefix is not needed when giving the intersection of 
two streets.  That is dropping the prefix will not lead to an ambiguous 
situation that could possible identify more the one location in the city.

2) The directional prefix is generally not on the signs.

3) The street prefix is generally not given when identifying a street 
(without given an address) by locals, in the news, etc.

The first one must apply, the second one should apply two, but what cities 
chose to put on the street signs is not always consistent so there are 
some cases where exceptions should be made.  Finally the third criteria 
should only be made by someone who has lived in the area.  Thus ultimately 
this should be a local decision.

In the case of Salt Lake City, all three criteria apply.  Thus the 
directional prefix should not be part of the street name for the area, but 
should be stored in a seperate tag to prevent the lose of information.