Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[Minh Nguyen]

On 2014-11-06 20:17, Elliott Plack wrote:

Thinking more on this, and using my experience in the foursquare
superuser editing community, trying to have a single "state" type entity
is really quite hard to scale globally. Political boundaries and
administrative levels vary all over the world, and trying to establish a
single name for a smaller political unit than the country is really
challenging. State? Province? Municipality? There are many names for
what a US State is (if you can really compare it out), and so to use
addr:state does seem fairly USA focused.


iD supports country-specific address formats. The "State" field only 
appears for features in the U.S., while Canadian address get a 
"Province" field. Vietnamese addresses get separate fields for 
subdistrict, district, city, and province, befitting the customary 
address format there.



Before the state showed up in iD, I had assumed someone could just
easily derive the US state from the postal code.


That would be the case if everyone entered ZIP codes. However, I got 
this field added [1] because its absence was confusing inexperienced 
mappers, leading to inconsistent or erroneous data entry. For example, 
people were setting addr:city to "Youngstown, Ohio" or "Dublin, OH" 
[2][3], or setting addr:postcode to "OH 45202", "OH", or "Ohio" 
[4][5][6]. This happened primarily in iD but also to a lesser extent in 
Potlatch, which also lacks a "State" field in simple mode.


[1] https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/pull/2402
[2] http://osm.org/node/2647332019/history
[3] http://osm.org/node/2152729301/history
[4] http://osm.org/node/2573293336/history
[5] http://osm.org/node/392309592/history
[6] http://osm.org/node/357466455/history

--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[Darrell Fuhriman]

That's a rather extreme definition of "third party data" and "cumbersome" for 
that matter. 

d. 

> On Nov 6, 2014, at 20:32, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 04:17 +, Elliott Plack wrote:
>> Before the state showed up in iD, I had assumed someone could just
>> easily derive the US state from the postal code.
> 
> Usually, yes, but that introduces a dependence on third party data
> (USPS) that really should not be there. That, and it can be cumbersome.
> 
> -- 
> Shawn K. Quinn 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 04:17 +, Elliott Plack wrote:
> Before the state showed up in iD, I had assumed someone could just
> easily derive the US state from the postal code. 

Usually, yes, but that introduces a dependence on third party data
(USPS) that really should not be there. That, and it can be cumbersome.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[Elliott Plack]

Thinking more on this, and using my experience in the foursquare superuser
editing community, trying to have a single "state" type entity is really
quite hard to scale globally. Political boundaries and administrative
levels vary all over the world, and trying to establish a single name for a
smaller political unit than the country is really challenging. State?
Province? Municipality? There are many names for what a US State is (if you
can really compare it out), and so to use addr:state does seem fairly USA
focused.

Before the state showed up in iD, I had assumed someone could just easily
derive the US state from the postal code.

Perhaps the tag should be addr:us_state?

Kindly,

Elliott

On Thu Nov 06 2014 at 4:24:14 PM Clifford Snow 
wrote:

>
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Shawn K. Quinn 
> wrote:
>
>> In the case of US state and Canadian province abbreviations, there is a
>> 1:1 correspondence with no ambiguity. Elsewhere this may or may not be
>> the case. That said, using the USPS abbreviations in the US makes the
>> most sense to me, as that is the format most of us who mail things with
>> any regularity are used to writing and seeing addresses in. I realize
>> it's an exception to the "don't abbreviate" rule but it does make some
>> sense at least to me.
>>
>
> +1
>
>
>
> --
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>  ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[Clifford Snow]

On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Shawn K. Quinn  wrote:

> In the case of US state and Canadian province abbreviations, there is a
> 1:1 correspondence with no ambiguity. Elsewhere this may or may not be
> the case. That said, using the USPS abbreviations in the US makes the
> most sense to me, as that is the format most of us who mail things with
> any regularity are used to writing and seeing addresses in. I realize
> it's an exception to the "don't abbreviate" rule but it does make some
> sense at least to me.
>

+1


-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On Thu, 2014-11-06 at 21:10 +, Elliott Plack wrote:
> Interesting about the Buck Act, however, the only info I could find
> about this oddity is from some websites written by conspiracy
> theorists, anti-government types, etc. Still, it would be in keeping
> with our practice of discouraging the use of abbreviations elsewhere
> in addresses. It would be very easy for a machine or renderer to
> abbreviate full state names down to USPS postal abbreviations, AP
> style guide abbreviations, or any other custom abbreviation.

In the case of US state and Canadian province abbreviations, there is a
1:1 correspondence with no ambiguity. Elsewhere this may or may not be
the case. That said, using the USPS abbreviations in the US makes the
most sense to me, as that is the format most of us who mail things with
any regularity are used to writing and seeing addresses in. I realize
it's an exception to the "don't abbreviate" rule but it does make some
sense at least to me.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[Elliott Plack]

Interesting about the Buck Act, however, the only info I could find about
this oddity is from some websites written by conspiracy theorists,
anti-government types, etc. Still, it would be in keeping with our practice
of discouraging the use of abbreviations elsewhere in addresses. It would
be very easy for a machine or renderer to abbreviate full state names down
to USPS postal abbreviations, AP style guide abbreviations, or any other
custom abbreviation.

On Thu Nov 06 2014 at 2:36:47 PM stevea  wrote:

>  Without getting all political on people, I do wish to remind everybody
> that Arizona is not AZ.  The former is one of the fifty sovereign states of
> the union, the latter is a (federal) corporate entity created by the Buck
> Act (oh, and coincidentally, conveniently used as a postal address by the
> USPS).  They are NOT the same thing, and they ARE two different things.
> Let's be careful to use the proper one, which I believe is Arizona.
>
> For example, I insist that I live in a place called California.  I
> absolutely do not live in a place called CA.  They are two different
> places, and one is not the other.  If we are being truly accurate, these
> are absolutely not freely interchangeable.
>
> While I agree that in some circumstances it is very convenient to use a
> two-letter abbreviation for a state, and I do on occasion take advantage of
> this convenience, please keep in mind the very distinct semantics which
> differentiate these entities.
>
> SteveA
> California
>
>
> wiki says to use abbreviated. see
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:state#For_countries_usin
> g_hamlet.2C_subdistrict.2C_district.2C_province.2C_state
>
> I almost had a panic attack because I use abbreviated state in all my
> addresses.
>
> Mike
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 8:51 PM, Hans De Kryger 
> wrote:
>
>
> ÐAs seen in this photo, the new feature in I.D has me a bit confused, As
> is the rule already in osm. We do not abbreviate addresses at all. My
> question would be, how do we add state data. Abbreviated as seen here (AZ)
> or spelled out (Arizona) ?
>
> Any help would be appreciated.
>
>
> *Regards,*
>
> *Hans*
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
>
> Content-Type: image/png; name="Capture.PNG"
> Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Capture.PNG"
> Content-ID: 
> X-Attachment-Id: ii_i25ilfei0_149830049aa034b6
>
>
>  ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] New I.D Feature

[stevea]

Without getting all political on people, I do 
wish to remind everybody that Arizona is not AZ. 
The former is one of the fifty sovereign states 
of the union, the latter is a (federal) corporate 
entity created by the Buck Act (oh, and 
coincidentally, conveniently used as a postal 
address by the USPS).  They are NOT the same 
thing, and they ARE two different things.  Let's 
be careful to use the proper one, which I believe 
is Arizona.


For example, I insist that I live in a place 
called California.  I absolutely do not live in a 
place called CA.  They are two different places, 
and one is not the other.  If we are being truly 
accurate, these are absolutely not freely 
interchangeable.


While I agree that in some circumstances it is 
very convenient to use a two-letter abbreviation 
for a state, and I do on occasion take advantage 
of this convenience, please keep in mind the very 
distinct semantics which differentiate these 
entities.


SteveA
California



wiki says to use abbreviated. see
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:state#For_countries_using_hamlet.2C_subdistrict.2C_district.2C_province.2C_state

I almost had a panic attack because I use 
abbreviated state in all my addresses.


Mike


On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 8:51 PM, Hans De Kryger 
<hans.dekryge...@gmail.com> 
wrote:



ÐAs seen in this photo, the new feature in I.D 
has me a bit confused, As is the rule already in 
osm. We do not abbreviate addresses at all. My 
question would be, how do we add state data. 
Abbreviated as seen here (AZ) or spelled out 
(Arizona) ?


Any help would be appreciated.

Regards,

Hans

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us



Content-Type: image/png; name="Capture.PNG"
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Capture.PNG"
Content-ID: 
X-Attachment-Id: ii_i25ilfei0_149830049aa034b6
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us