Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.
On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 6:29 PM Kevin Kenny wrote: > Heh. Sometimes you have to wait a long time. The signage on 'Avenue of > the Americas' in New York City has said that since the 1950's. The > Postal Service prefers that name on street addresses. New Yorkers > call it Sixth Avenue, which confuses the tourists no end. Likewise, > to a New Yorker, Bruckner Boulevard goes over the Triboro[ugh] Bridge > coming out of the Bronx. The signs say I-278 and Robert F. Kennedy > Bridge. The locals never do. When asked about them, the likely > response will be something like, 'oh, yeah, they renamed one of the > bridges for Bobby Kennedy, didn't they?" > Reminds me of how long it took Portland to phase in Martin Luther King, Junior Boulevard, and old timers for various reasons (many of them rather reprehensible) that still call that street "Union Avenue" or even it's even older name, "Railroad Avenue"... > > Sometimes, the name really is "Highway 66" or "Route 22." Admittedly, it > can sometimes be hard to tell for sure without local knowledge. As long as > people do their best and aren't dogmatic about it when someone who knows > better comes along in the future it will all work out in the end. > > ^ This. The name of a geographic feature is what the locals call it. > Why should 150th Street be a name, but County Road 34 have to be > relegated to noname=yes if it has no other name? (Then again, I come > from a part of the world that has settlements named Number Four, > Township 40, and Thirteenth Lake. Those things all started out as > reference numbers but are now established names.) > It's pretty common for county roads to not have names, only refs, though. Why tag twice? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.
On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 4:18 PM Nathan Mills wrote: > My personal opinion is that if local practice and the USPS continue to use > the old name, that name should stay in the name tag, while the Legislature's > political name should be tagged as an alt_name. That said, there are > situations in which most/all signage refers to the new name, in which case > switching them makes sense. (Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard in > Fayetteville, AR being an example. Most still call it 6th Street, but the > city, nearly all signage, and the USPS' preferred name are all "Martin Luther > King Jr Boulevard," and they are going to keep it up until everyone gets with > the program) Heh. Sometimes you have to wait a long time. The signage on 'Avenue of the Americas' in New York City has said that since the 1950's. The Postal Service prefers that name on street addresses. New Yorkers call it Sixth Avenue, which confuses the tourists no end. Likewise, to a New Yorker, Bruckner Boulevard goes over the Triboro[ugh] Bridge coming out of the Bronx. The signs say I-278 and Robert F. Kennedy Bridge. The locals never do. When asked about them, the likely response will be something like, 'oh, yeah, they renamed one of the bridges for Bobby Kennedy, didn't they?" > Sometimes, the name really is "Highway 66" or "Route 22." Admittedly, it can > sometimes be hard to tell for sure without local knowledge. As long as people > do their best and aren't dogmatic about it when someone who knows better > comes along in the future it will all work out in the end. ^ This. The name of a geographic feature is what the locals call it. Why should 150th Street be a name, but County Road 34 have to be relegated to noname=yes if it has no other name? (Then again, I come from a part of the world that has settlements named Number Four, Township 40, and Thirteenth Lake. Those things all started out as reference numbers but are now established names.) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.
The New Sapulpa Road situation is in practice a road with a secondary name. Just like Flagler Street in part of Miami (FL, not OK) is defined by the state legislature as being "Natan A Rok Boulevard" (or similar, working from memory here). My personal opinion is that if local practice and the USPS continue to use the old name, that name should stay in the name tag, while the Legislature's political name should be tagged as an alt_name. That said, there are situations in which most/all signage refers to the new name, in which case switching them makes sense. (Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard in Fayetteville, AR being an example. Most still call it 6th Street, but the city, nearly all signage, and the USPS' preferred name are all "Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard," and they are going to keep it up until everyone gets with the program) Sometimes, the name really is "Highway 66" or "Route 22." Admittedly, it can sometimes be hard to tell for sure without local knowledge. As long as people do their best and aren't dogmatic about it when someone who knows better comes along in the future it will all work out in the end. -Nathan On September 1, 2018 5:28:11 PM EDT, Paul Johnson wrote: >On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 12:01 PM Peter Dobratz wrote: > >To cite a specific example of how we might map something, consider the >town >> of Waldport, Oregon. >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.42718/-124.06667 >> >> As you can see, there is a US Route 101 running north-south through >town. >> Roads north of Northwest Hemlock Street include Northwest as part of >their >> names and roads south of Northwest Hemlock Street include Southwest >as part >> of their name. US Route 101 is currently mapped in OSM with >> "name=Northwest Highway 101" for the portions north of Northwest >Hemlock >> Street and "name="Southwest Highway 101" for the portions south of >> Northwest Hemlock Street. If we drop the name tag from this road in >OSM, >> then we lose the Northwest and Southwest directional prefix. I think >we >> should retain the name tags on roads like this. >> > >I don't. While it is uncommon, there's other ways of handling this. >The >way should still be noname=yes in this case. > > >> Here is an examples of a POI along this route: >> >> https://www.grand-central-pizza.com/ >> Grand Central Pizza >> 245 SW Hwy 101 >> Waldport, OR 97394 >> >> USPS standard format of the address: >> 245 SW HIGHWAY 101 >> WALDPORT, OR 97394-3036 >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/463377211 >> addr:housenumber=245 >> addr:street=Southwest Highway 101 >> addr:city=Waldport >> addr:state=OR >> addr:postcode=97394 >> > >And this is how you would handle addresses along such a highway. This >also >comes up (uncommon but still happens) where the USPS has decided to >consider addresses with a different name than the street that frontages >it. In an extreme example, there's a road in my region that has the >name >"Officer Larry W. Cantrell and Mister Charles L. Cantrell Memorial >Highway". The addresses along it are all "New Sapulpa Road", the >road's >old name, presumably due to brevity. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.
= there are some roads in Massachusetts that have actual names and route numbers (example: name="Grand Army of the Republic Highway" ref="US 6"), but for reasons unknown there are street addresses like "3570 Route 6". Even though there is zero evidence that "Route 6" is is any way a street name. As far as I know this is limited to on the order of a half dozen roads, 1 US highway and about 5 state highways, mainly in the southeast and cape. = This is extremely common across the USA. Post office addresses can refer to "road names" or highway numbers when the road is both. The post office does not seem to care one way or the other, and two addresses side-by-side can have the road name address for one and the highway number address for the next. Alternatively, you can send mail to the same address number and use either the road name or highway number and both will be delivered by the post office with hardly a bat of the eye. Kerry Irons Adventure Cycling Association ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.
On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 5:28 AM Greg Troxel wrote: > > From: Albert Pundt > Subject: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate > X", etc. > To: "talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap" > > Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 22:06:50 -0400 (10 hours, 17 minutes, 15 seconds > ago) > Attachment: [3. text/html]... > > I notice the user SSR_317 has been adding the route numbers of unnamed > roads to the name=* tag of roads around Indianapolis. For example, > name=Interstate > 465, name=US 31, name=State Route 37, etc. Isn't this practice frowned > upon > as being redundant and not reflecting the lack of a proper name to the > road? This seems to be the case around the country. All route numbers > were > listed in alternate names of the roads in the original TIGER data, but > the > vast majority of these have been removed in favor of route relations and > ref=* tags. > > I removed these name tags from the affected roads, but the user has since > re-added them. > > Seconded or thirded: a route number is not an actual name and does not > belong in the name tag, or even alt_name. > > This has come up (in discussion, not actual edits as far as I know) > because there are some roads in Massachusetts that have actual names and > route numbers (example: name="Grand Army of the Republic Highway" > ref="US 6"), but for reasons unknown there are street addresses like > "3570 Route 6". Even though there is zero evidence that "Route 6" is is > any way a street name. As far as I know this is limited to on the > order of a half dozen roads, 1 US highway and about 5 state highways, > mainly in the southeast and cape. > > So beyond agreeing that sticking things in name (presumably on the > notion that everything should have a name, even though that notion is > confused as the real world does not have that property), I wanted to > point out that just because a building near a road has an *address* with > a name, doesn't mean that the road itself has that name. > As a counterpoint to this, consider that street names in OSM include directional prefix, base name, suffix, and directional suffix. The post office breaks down the standard components of delivery address line here: https://pe.usps.com/text/pub28/28c2_012.htm In this example of "101 W Main St S Apt 12" we would represent this address OSM in the following tags on the POI Node or Area: addr:housenumber=101 addr:street=West Main Street South addr:unit=12 On the nearby Way for the street, there would be a "name=West Main Street South" tag. Values in addr:street do need to include numbered routes when the numbered route is part of the actual address. The post office shows some examples of various variations on standard names for numbered routes here: https://pe.usps.com/text/pub28/28apf.htm To cite a specific example of how we might map something, consider the town of Waldport, Oregon. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/44.42718/-124.06667 As you can see, there is a US Route 101 running north-south through town. Roads north of Northwest Hemlock Street include Northwest as part of their names and roads south of Northwest Hemlock Street include Southwest as part of their name. US Route 101 is currently mapped in OSM with "name=Northwest Highway 101" for the portions north of Northwest Hemlock Street and "name="Southwest Highway 101" for the portions south of Northwest Hemlock Street. If we drop the name tag from this road in OSM, then we lose the Northwest and Southwest directional prefix. I think we should retain the name tags on roads like this. Here is an examples of a POI along this route: https://www.grand-central-pizza.com/ Grand Central Pizza 245 SW Hwy 101 Waldport, OR 97394 USPS standard format of the address: 245 SW HIGHWAY 101 WALDPORT, OR 97394-3036 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/463377211 addr:housenumber=245 addr:street=Southwest Highway 101 addr:city=Waldport addr:state=OR addr:postcode=97394 I believe this is correct in OSM. The value in addr:street matches the name tag on the nearby road. The fact that the road is a member of the route 101 route relation and ref=US 101 tag on the Way does not capture the directional prefix on portions of the road. Peter ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.
From: Albert Pundt Subject: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc. To: "talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap" Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 22:06:50 -0400 (10 hours, 17 minutes, 15 seconds ago) Attachment: [3. text/html]... I notice the user SSR_317 has been adding the route numbers of unnamed roads to the name=* tag of roads around Indianapolis. For example, name=Interstate 465, name=US 31, name=State Route 37, etc. Isn't this practice frowned upon as being redundant and not reflecting the lack of a proper name to the road? This seems to be the case around the country. All route numbers were listed in alternate names of the roads in the original TIGER data, but the vast majority of these have been removed in favor of route relations and ref=* tags. I removed these name tags from the affected roads, but the user has since re-added them. Seconded or thirded: a route number is not an actual name and does not belong in the name tag, or even alt_name. This has come up (in discussion, not actual edits as far as I know) because there are some roads in Massachusetts that have actual names and route numbers (example: name="Grand Army of the Republic Highway" ref="US 6"), but for reasons unknown there are street addresses like "3570 Route 6". Even though there is zero evidence that "Route 6" is is any way a street name. As far as I know this is limited to on the order of a half dozen roads, 1 US highway and about 5 state highways, mainly in the southeast and cape. So beyond agreeing that sticking things in name (presumably on the notion that everything should have a name, even though that notion is confused as the real world does not have that property), I wanted to point out that just because a building near a road has an *address* with a name, doesn't mean that the road itself has that name. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.
Yeah, I agree, it is redundant and thus completely unnecessary to put the highway number in the name tag. Have you informed SSR_317 about this discussion? On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 7:09 PM Albert Pundt wrote: > I notice the user SSR_317 has been adding the route numbers of unnamed > roads to the name=* tag of roads around Indianapolis. For example, > name=Interstate > 465, name=US 31, name=State Route 37, etc. Isn't this practice frowned > upon as being redundant and not reflecting the lack of a proper name to the > road? This seems to be the case around the country. All route numbers were > listed in alternate names of the roads in the original TIGER data, but the > vast majority of these have been removed in favor of route relations and > ref=* tags. > > I removed these name tags from the affected roads, but the user has since > re-added them. > > —Albert Pundt > ___ > 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] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.
Yes, this is correct. name=* is only the name. Ideally, the ref=* tag should be *supplemental* to a proper route relation at this point (especially in Indiana, where I am aware of a *nine-way* concurrency, something ref=* just doesn't handle very elegantly at all in even the slightest stretch of the imagination. On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 9:08 PM Albert Pundt wrote: > I notice the user SSR_317 has been adding the route numbers of unnamed > roads to the name=* tag of roads around Indianapolis. For example, > name=Interstate > 465, name=US 31, name=State Route 37, etc. Isn't this practice frowned > upon as being redundant and not reflecting the lack of a proper name to the > road? This seems to be the case around the country. All route numbers were > listed in alternate names of the roads in the original TIGER data, but the > vast majority of these have been removed in favor of route relations and > ref=* tags. > > I removed these name tags from the affected roads, but the user has since > re-added them. > > —Albert Pundt > ___ > 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
[Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.
I notice the user SSR_317 has been adding the route numbers of unnamed roads to the name=* tag of roads around Indianapolis. For example, name=Interstate 465, name=US 31, name=State Route 37, etc. Isn't this practice frowned upon as being redundant and not reflecting the lack of a proper name to the road? This seems to be the case around the country. All route numbers were listed in alternate names of the roads in the original TIGER data, but the vast majority of these have been removed in favor of route relations and ref=* tags. I removed these name tags from the affected roads, but the user has since re-added them. —Albert Pundt ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
