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

[Serge Wroclawski]

Steven,

Thanks for the reply.

More inline.

On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Steven Johnson <sejohnson8 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.

You gave one example, which I'll address later in the mail, but more
examples makes your case more salient.

> 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.

This is one I'm not sure I get, so let's discuss it.

Let's use a real world example (other than the one you use later):

Are you saying it reduces the ambiguity between K Street NW and K
Street SE (in Washington, DC)?

If this would be your example (and I don't know if it is) then I don't
see how it reduces ambiguity, since the name of the street will be
different.

> 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.

What kind of local characteristics?

> Since local conditions vary so
> widely across the US, having more tags gives mappers more flexibility to tag
> what they see.

How does it give them more flexibility to tag what they see? Are you
suggesting that this replace (rather than supplement) the "name" tag?

> 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

You keep using the word "ambiguity" but the names appear to be unique
to me- strange, but unique.

> 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.

How does it facilitate import of address data?

And please address the issues #2- users actually using this format.

That's the key feature- will human beings do it?

- Serge