[Talk-us] Feature proposal: proposed expanded address tagging scheme for US

[Steven Johnson]

Richard & Serge,

Thanks for the comments. Let me see if I can clarify...

The problem: Unlike other (mostly European) countries, there are at least 4
street naming schemes, and 2 property numbering schemes in the US. This
makes a set of one-size-fits-all tags for addresses both unwieldy,
imprecise, and ambiguous. It forces local mappers to overload the
addr:street tag with directional prefixes, suffixes, and street types. It
perpetuates ambiguity and lessens the value of the data, as well as
constraining mappers from adequately describing local conditions.

The solution: splitting out the tags has several advantages:
1) Increase the descriptive power of the tags. Specific tags make the parts
of the address absolutely clear, and make it easier to distinguish places
with similar addresses.

2) Provide local mappers with greater specificity and ability to accurately
tag local conditions. Lumping directionals and street types into
addr:street obscures local characteristics of addresses. Since local
conditions vary so widely across the US, having more tags gives mappers
more flexibility to tag what they see.

3) Remove ambiguity. Look closely at these streets in Hickory, NC and
you'll see what I mean by ambiguous names and types:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=35.75139&lon=-81.35898&zoom=17&layers=M

4) Facilitates supervised imports of address data. I know imports are
fraught with difficulty (and I'm not explicitly advocating address
imports), but it is important to note that agencies that manage address
data almost certainly will have prefix, name, type, suffix broken out.

Thanks again for the comments. Hopes these comments help make the case for
expanded tagging.

-- SEJ
-- twitter: @geomantic
-- skype: sejohnson8

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." --
Einstein



On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Richard Welty <rwelty at averillpark.net>wrote:

> i'm sort of on the fence here. perhaps Steven could outline the use cases
> for this expanded format;
> what becomes possible with it that is not possible or is more difficult
> with the current schema?
>
> richard
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-us<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20121118/c452e7c6/attachment.html>