[Talk-us] Why addr:state rather than is_in:state?

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Alan Mintz
<Alan_Mintz+OSM at earthlink.net> wrote:
> At 2010-12-31 14:22, Toby Murray wrote:
>>
>> ... Also, is there much value in
>> adding these tags on multi-state relations? For example:
>> addr:state=TN;KY;OH;IN on this relation:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/444136
>
> [ US-27 ]
>
> Not IMO for US-* routes. No more than tagging everything other feature with
> the state in which it lies, that is. In that absurd case, is_in:state would
> be more appropriate, IMO.

It's part of the main US 27 relation:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/444137