[OSM-talk] Validator and unnamed ways

[Andy Robinson]

Francisco R. Santos wrote:
>Sent: 22 September 2007 9:03 AM
>To: talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: [OSM-talk] Validator and unnamed ways
>
>
>2007/9/22, Cameron Patrick <cameron at patrick.wattle.id.au>:
>
>	"Unnamed way" generates far too many false positives.
>
>
>
>I've seen lately that too many people are complaining about the "unnamed
>way" test giving too many false positives. Right now, the ways that
>Validator checks for a name (or a ref, or a *_name or a *_ref) are
>"motorway", "trunk", "primary", "secondary", "tertiary", "residential" and
>"pedestrian". As I may infer from the wiki page(s), all of this categories
>*should* have a name, so I don't understand the false positives. Maybe some
>residential roads in rural areas have no name, but otherwise, i don't
>undestand the problem.
>


It's not the case that all of these necessarily have a name, especially in
urban areas. In some countries streets don't have a name at all (I know
areas of Kuwait didn't when I was last there for instance). Also some
streets might be associated with other streets but don't display a name, and
hence they have to be left nameless.

>So, I kindly ask people that complain for too many false positives to tell
>me why any of theese roads doesn't have a name (or ref).
>
>Regards,
>Quico
>
>


Cheers

Andy

Andy Robinson
Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk