[OSM-talk] shortened names

James Hogan james at albanarts.com
Tue Jul 26 23:56:49 BST 2011

On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 08:05:47PM +0200, colliar wrote:
> Am 08.07.2011 05:49, schrieb John Harvey:
> > I find there are a lot more abbreviations if you look at addr:street=
> > rather than the name= .  I suspect that with mobile entry of POI's we
> > are going to see more and more abbreviations being entered, just because
> > mobile keyboards are slow.  I would applaud a bot that asked me if I
> > meant the nearby "Main Street" when I entered "Main St.".  I would also
> > applaud a bot that converted loose addresses like this into better
> > structured relations like:
> > 
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema#Using_relations_to_associate_house_and_street_.28optional.29 
> I use associatedStreet relations for some time now but we might need to
> adjust it a bit:
>   1. More than one way with role=street should be allowed.
> Otherwise you end up with lots of relations and I do not know any editor
> which supports this relation when splitting ways.

I use type=street:
which in my opinion is more concise and flexible, and permits multiple
ways with role=street. There are 10k instances instead of 40k for
associatedStreet. Unfortunately the tools don't seem to understand it
yet, e.g. searching for "19 third avenue, york", nominatum gets the
wrong house:


>   2. the role=house should also work with closed ways and relations.
> For closed ways it is obviours since buildings are mapped as areas.
> I found many places where an area with several buildings has one
> address, sometimes theses areas are site or multipolygon relations.
> I found some streets with more than one postcode. For these streets I
> used one relation for each postcode and added the postcode in the
> relation's name + addr:street=[Streetname]
> I grouped them in a main relation which might be not needed.
> >> i was under the impression consensus was to type the full word, then
> >> renderers would shorten where necessary? apparently some mappers
> >> disagree though
> +1
> cu colliar
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

More information about the talk mailing list