On 31 Jul 2010, at 21:58 , Kevin Atkinson wrote: > On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Val Kartchner wrote: > >> On Sat, 2010-07-31 at 21:31 -0600, Kevin Atkinson wrote: >>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Val Kartchner wrote: >>> >>>> 1) I agree with most of your proposal. >>>> a) Your proposal doesn't take into account cases where there is both a >>>> name and a numeric designation for a street. An instance in Ogden, >>>> Utah is "Washington Boulevard" and its alias "400 East". >>> >>> In both cases doesn't a directional prefix apply. >>> >>> However, to avoid ambiguity with the "_prefix" tag. How about this rule. >>> The "_prefix" and "_suffix" apply to all name tags. Hence if name_1 is >>> "400 East" than name_1_prefix shall be "S", etc. >> >> So, you're also proposing that the additional name(s) be placed in >> "name_1", etc. > > No. I'm saying _if_ the name is places in name_1 than use name_1_prefix, if > it is placed in alt_name, use alt_name_prefix, etc. >
alt_name has a specific meaning and shouldn't be used for this. also name_1,2 … was used for Tiger with the same purpose as alt_name. Now if you play around with prefeix, postfix, abbrev or expanded name it's better to use a different tag osm strength is to make this easy. So no reason to overload existing well defined tags with info which doesn't belong there and creates even more confusion. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
