Re: [Talk-us] Street Naming Conventions
Hi, On 15 May 2010 05:58, David ``Smith'' wrote: > I now believe that it is /also/ acceptable for the > "name=*" tag to specify the full, unabbreviated name -- however, if > abbreviation of that name is used commonly and consistently, then that > abbreviated form should go in another tag. (I've been using > "abbr_name=*" for that.) > > 2) I've heard there's a bot that's automatically expanding names from > the TIGER import. To the operator of that bot: proceed with caution > if you will, and /PLEASE/ preserve the abbreviated name in some other > tag(s). I've also been using abbr_name where there's a non-obvious way to abbreviate the name, but actually there's no reason why it couldn't be used always for commonly used abbreviated versions, other than it's a bit of work to add. In case of TIGER (I'm the person that ran the bot) it can be done automatically to some extent so I can make another run to re-add the original shortened names as abbr_name. The original names, however, were shortened according to some rules documented in the TIGER docs, regardless of how common or consistent their usage was (following the USPS rules, for example, they would be different in some small percentage), so I'm not sure if that name should ever appear in a tag that is not namespaced as a tiger tag. On the other hand it may be a good start for the abbr_name values, in 90% cases it should just be correct. In the remaining cases they can be fixed manually (rather than having to add *all* abbr_names manually) and specially if we can get mapnik to use the value of that tag when there isn't enough space for the full name, then mappers would probably put some care in maintaining the values correct. Cheers ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Street Naming Conventions
I happen to know the answer to this one. I'll save Brett the trouble of replying again, and point you to an earlier explanation in this thread. (Though being so long, I don't blame you for not seeing it the first time around.) http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2010-April/003087.html It seems really odd to me, too, but it's not the first time customs have developed in odd ways... Nathan Oliver On 5/17/2010 7:01 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > Dale Puch wrote: > >> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Nathan Edgars II > gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Lord-Castillo, Brett wrote: >>> But another good one close to us is "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St Rd" (both official names for different sections of the road). These two streets run parallel to Olive St, Olive Street Rd, and Olive Blvd (all three of these are different roads). >>> So if "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St Rd" are different, how >>> do you distinguish them in speech? Or are they actually >>> interchangeable names, as would seem logical (in other words, one or >>> the other may be "official", but both are unambiguous and correct for >>> all practical purposes)? >>> >> If "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St Rd" are one road, ie. connected >> and not and a corner. Then things that may explain it are different >> addresses where they intersect, or if they are in different jurisdictions. >> Like where two cities meet. But if the addressing continues between the >> different names, then it seem one sign is wrong. I personally think "Old >> Olive Street Rd" should be used, and only cardinal direction prefix and type >> suffix abbreviated. The rest being the core name. >> > I'm not sure what you mean - if you tell someone "I live at 50 Old > Olive Street Rd", how is that any different from "I live at 50 Old > Olive St Rd"? (Obviously one would need to specify which city the > address is in, if the "official" name changes at the city line. But, > without the city name, neither of those statements, even written, > would be truly unambiguous, since the reader can't assume the chosen > Street or St is identical to the "official" usage. In fact, if we do > name these segments differently, it could cause more confusion, since > someone typing one might be taken to the "official" match when they > wanted the other one and didn't realize they were "officially" > different.) > > As for abbreviations, there's no consistent way to abbreviate. Around > here, you'll see Parkway, Pkwy, Pky, and Py all used for the same > road. And directional prefixes are part of the address, appearing > above the block number in a separate square on street signs. > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Street Naming Conventions
Dale Puch wrote: >On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >> Lord-Castillo, Brett wrote: >>> But another good one close to us is "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive >>> St Rd" (both official names for different sections of the road). These two >>> streets run parallel to Olive St, Olive Street Rd, and Olive Blvd (all three >>> of these are different roads). >> >> So if "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St Rd" are different, how >> do you distinguish them in speech? Or are they actually >> interchangeable names, as would seem logical (in other words, one or >> the other may be "official", but both are unambiguous and correct for >> all practical purposes)? >If "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St Rd" are one road, ie. connected >and not and a corner. Then things that may explain it are different >addresses where they intersect, or if they are in different jurisdictions. >Like where two cities meet. But if the addressing continues between the >different names, then it seem one sign is wrong. I personally think "Old >Olive Street Rd" should be used, and only cardinal direction prefix and type >suffix abbreviated. The rest being the core name. I'm not sure what you mean - if you tell someone "I live at 50 Old Olive Street Rd", how is that any different from "I live at 50 Old Olive St Rd"? (Obviously one would need to specify which city the address is in, if the "official" name changes at the city line. But, without the city name, neither of those statements, even written, would be truly unambiguous, since the reader can't assume the chosen Street or St is identical to the "official" usage. In fact, if we do name these segments differently, it could cause more confusion, since someone typing one might be taken to the "official" match when they wanted the other one and didn't realize they were "officially" different.) As for abbreviations, there's no consistent way to abbreviate. Around here, you'll see Parkway, Pkwy, Pky, and Py all used for the same road. And directional prefixes are part of the address, appearing above the block number in a separate square on street signs. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Street Naming Conventions
If "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St Rd" are one road, ie. connected and not and a corner. Then things that may explain it are different addresses where they intersect, or if they are in different jurisdictions. Like where two cities meet. But if the addressing continues between the different names, then it seem one sign is wrong. I personally think "Old Olive Street Rd" should be used, and only cardinal direction prefix and type suffix abbreviated. The rest being the core name. That said, someone really liked to use Olive in the naming Dale On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > Lord-Castillo, Brett wrote: > >But another good one close to us is "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive > St Rd" (both official names for different sections of the road). These two > streets run parallel to Olive St, Olive Street Rd, and Olive Blvd (all three > of these are different roads). > > So if "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St Rd" are different, how > do you distinguish them in speech? Or are they actually > interchangeable names, as would seem logical (in other words, one or > the other may be "official", but both are unambiguous and correct for > all practical purposes)? > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > -- Dale Puch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Street Naming Conventions
Lord-Castillo, Brett wrote: >But another good one close to us is "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St >Rd" (both official names for different sections of the road). These two >streets run parallel to Olive St, Olive Street Rd, and Olive Blvd (all three >of these are different roads). So if "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St Rd" are different, how do you distinguish them in speech? Or are they actually interchangeable names, as would seem logical (in other words, one or the other may be "official", but both are unambiguous and correct for all practical purposes)? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Street Naming Conventions
I always go with my classic example (which all of the major online map services currently render incorrectly): North Outer 40 Road (which runs adjacent to and parallel to interstate 64). The name of the road is "North Outer 40". The type is "Road". It is named this because Interstate 64 used to be US Highway 40, and the road was set up to run parallel to Highway 40 on both side of the highway when it was a highway. The highway is now an interstate, but the reference to "40" was kept (so "Forty" is incorrect and it is not an address number). The road runs east-west mostly, but also runs north-south for an extensive stretch. South Outer 40 Rd runs alongside the south side of the interstate. As for parsing type, I've always liked the street that our EOC is on (see below). Depending on which part of the address you get, you might think the street type was "Dr", "Xing", "Blfs" or even the ever popular "Xing Dr". But another good one close to us is "Old Olive Street Rd" and "Old Olive St Rd" (both official names for different sections of the road). These two streets run parallel to Olive St, Olive Street Rd, and Olive Blvd (all three of these are different roads). If you have street name by itself and full name, then I could see possibly deriving all of these correctly. The problem comes when people interpret the street name incorrectly (e.g. "North Outer 40", "Outer 40", "40", "Outer", "North Outer"; "Ladue", "Ladue Bluffs", "Ladue Bluffs Crossing"; "Olive", "Olive Street", "Olive St", "Old Olive", "Old Olive St", "Old Olive Street". Not sure if four separate fields will create more data entry errors, or will create more attention to detail. Brett Lord-Castillo Information Systems Designer/GIS Programmer St. Louis County Police Office of Emergency Management 14847 Ladue Bluffs Crossing Drive Chesterfield, MO 63017 Office: 314-628-5400 Fax: 314-628-5508 Direct: 314-628-5407 -Original Message- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 13:16:22 -0700 From: Richard Finegold Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Street Naming Conventions To: val...@gmail.com Cc: OSM Talk US Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 20:18, Val Kartchner wrote: > This topic has been dropped without it having been resolved. ?We still > need some way of addressing the issues summarized in > "http://vidthekid.info/misc/osm-abbr.html";. ?This can be summarized as > needing to create fields for: > > ?direction prefix > ?street name > ?street type > ?direction suffix > > This is needed for exactly the same reason that no abbreviations are > supposed to be used in OSM: There is no automated way to fix the parts > of a street name. > > For instance, here are some actual addresses which occur in this area: > > ?Number ?Prefix ?Street Name ? ? ? ? ?Type ? ?Suffix > ?200 ? ? West ? ?North Temple ? ? ? ? Street > ?200 ? ? East ? ?South Temple ? ? ? ? Street > ?200 ? ? North ? West Temple ? ? ? ? ?Street > ?50 ? ? ?East ? ?North Lakeview ? ? ? Drive > ?50 ? ? ?East ? ?South Lakeview ? ? ? Drive > ?2450 ? ?North ? E ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Street > ?300 ? ? ? ? ? ? Southgate ? ? ? ? ? ?Drive > ?4700 ? ?West ? ?3300 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Street ?South > > These are just samples, but others on this list have come up with other > examples that demonstrate the problems with the current way of doing > things. ?Also, in the last example given above, the "Type" and "Suffix" > would be swapped, but in most written addresses the "Type" would be > dropped. I'll again claim that just one field would be enough -- the street name -- and the other three can be derived from their offsets; trivial for direction prefix, and slightly more complicated (requiring a dictionary/list of directions, anything left over goes into the street type field) for the latter two. Can you offer any examples where these three would be difficult to derive if one was provided only full name and street name? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
