[Talk-us] Fwd: Feature Proposal - RFC - Directional Prefix & Suffix Indication

Mike Thompson miketho16 at gmail.com
Tue Aug 24 03:53:31 BST 2010


>
> All that aside, multiple types of land records for different uses, as well
> as existing maps, all agree
Then under the guidelines I suggested, it would seem that this is a
valid case where directionals are not really part of the street name
and are in the data only because of Tiger.  The issue I had with the
"tests" as proposed is that they would cause the directionals to be
removed in the areas that I am familiar with, when I don't think that
should be the case.  You are in a different area.


>>  You have heard of cartographic liberty?
>> Small adjustments to the map that cartographers (or rendering sw)
>> makes to the map to make it more meaningful and at the same time
>> making ever thing fit on the sheet or screen?  This is exactly what
>> the people responsible for the signs are doing.
>
> By not adding a single letter and a space? Really? That just doesn't make
> sense. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible - just that it's far less
> likely to be the correct interpretation.
I have seen cases in the same city where some signs have the
directionals in the same font size as the rest of the street name, and
on other signs they have it in smaller font size.

>
>> I also wouldn't put too much weight on what locals call the street in
>> everyday conversation.
>
> You want to ignore the most obvious interpretation of signage, records, and
> existing maps.
I will try and collection some photos of signs where the
interpretation is not as obvious and post here.

> Now we're going to exclude the knowledge of the people that
> actually live with and use the information, too? What's left? Personal
> opinion of how things ought to be?
I am sorry if I didn't make myself clear.  I am certainly not
suggesting we ignore the _knowledge_ of local residents. My point is
people use short hand in every day conversation.  It doesn't mean what
they say in those conversations is the official name, or that it
represents their understanding of the official name.  If you actually
asked them the official name they may respond in a different manner.
Therefore I don't think it is always valid to say "I have never heard
anyone call it North Whatever Street."

> I don't think we can create absolute rules for this - you either know it's
> one way or the other in your area (based on agreement of signage, records,
> and local usage), or you don't. If you know, move the prefix out of the
> name. If you don't, don't. I'd suggest having the discussion with local
> mappers before doing a large area to resolve any valid objections.
Agree.  Perhaps we should stress in the proposal that several local
experienced mappers should agree to the change.



More information about the Talk-us mailing list