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

Mike Thompson miketho16 at gmail.com
Tue Aug 24 04:02:06 BST 2010

On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Alan Mintz
> <Alan_Mintz+OSM at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> At 2010-08-22 19:28, you wrote:
>>> I wouldn't put too much stock in the fact that directionals on street
>>> signs are often in smaller fonts.  The people who are responsible for
>>> such signs are trying to make them useful while holding down cost (and
>>> not having street signs that are exceptionally long).
>> I disagree. There is no reason to think that they are not also trying to
>> show that the directional is part of the block number, not the name, and in
>> exactly the way that one would expect - by making it smaller and positioned
>> with the block number, and not the name. Logic says this is the more likely
>> intent of the sign makers. When someone uses a different font in a document,
>> they are usually trying to tell the user that the information is of a
>> different type than that shown in other fonts.
> Perhaps a better example is Orlando. I linked a photo in the previous
> thread: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.515555,-81.392877&spn=0.015404,0.041199&t=k&z=16&layer=c&cbll=28.515547,-81.393042&panoid=FgoBLwm7V3KHZOXf7Oklcw&cbp=12,122.26,,1,-0.48
> The directions are clearly marked as part of the addresses here.
I would agree with your interpretation of this sign.  In this case the
directional and the address range are set off in their own block.  The
examples that I am talking about are different.  I will try and
collect some examples and post here.

More information about the Talk-us mailing list