Thank you for the discussion so far. I've been thinking about a solution for tagging localities that would work for both mappers who want to tag locality types and those who don't. Current proposals (addr:town|village and addr:locality|sublocality) are two distinct and incompatible tagging schemes so reaching a consensus may be impossible.
How about tagging localities as addr:locality|sublocality _and_ addr:locality|sublocality:type=city|town|suburb|village|hamlet|campus, so they can be added separately and at different times? Best regards, Andrzej On 28 January 2019 04:40:26 GMT+08:00, Andrzej <nd...@redhazel.co.uk> wrote: >Hi, > >When working on post codes in East Anglia I realised the current >address tagging scheme is insufficient for even fairly basic scenarios. >I have already discussed the issues with some of the most experienced >mappers and like to bring these issues to your attention. Robert has >summarised his ideas in >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rjw62/UK_Address_Mapping > >The bottom line is, I would like to be tag commonly used addresses >without losing information and without resorting to addr:full. > >Issues: >1. Post towns (most pressing one because there is a lot of confusion >around it). The UK is fairly unique in that not every town is a post >town. This makes it impossible to tag e.g. Station Road, Histon, >Cambridge CB24 9LF. >Wiki recommends addr:city to be used for tagging post towns (Cambridge) >but then how do we tag Histon? >- Robert recommends sticking to the current meaning of addr:city and >using addr:town and addr:village for town and village names, which, >although not in wiki, are already being used in the UK. I like this >solution because it is very explicit in what each addr: key means and >it doesn't redefine addr:city. >- SK53 prefers using addr:city for everything (towns, even villages) >and either not tagging post towns (they can be seen as a an internal >detail of a closed Royal Mail database) or using a new tag for it, like >addr:post_town. It is a simple solution, results in Histon being called >Histon and not Cambridge (without introducing new tags for town and >village names) and is commonly used. It is also a bit confusing (what >exactly is a city?) and I think we we should at least support tagging >post towns. > >Key questions: >a) addr:city for post towns or towns and villages? >b) how to rag remaining information (respectively, towns and villages >or post towns,) > >2. Tagging addresses within campuses, business parks etc. There is >addr:place but it is supposed to be used instead of addr:street. Again, >Robert has a fairly decent proposal for that using addr:place or >addr:locality and addr:parentstreet. Please comment. > >2a. should buildings in campuses be tagged with >addr:buildingnumber/name or addr:unit? I would prefer >buildingname/number (as they are often subdivided) but these seem to be >associated with addr:street. > >3. Similar to (2) but for buildings. Tagging buildings that have e.g. a >single name but multiple house numbers? > >Best regards, >ndrw6
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
