On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 4:57 AM Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
> Follow-up question on that: are all route relation names/refs mapped as
> route=highway in the US usable as an address part or is that restricted to
> certain routes and/or regions (for example, rural only)?
>
>
It's case-by-case. Near me,
On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 04:28:43PM -0400, Jmapb wrote:
> On 8/3/2020 6:07 AM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
>
> > There is some fuzzy matching, you can expect to work, for example
> > abbreviations like street -> st or even New York -> NY. But going from
> > ref=NY-214 to 'State Highway 214' is already a
sent from a phone
> On 3. Aug 2020, at 23:57, Jmapb wrote:
>
> The official postal version of the street name may be tagged as
> `official_name`;
IMHO official_name is not a suitable tag for an officially unnamed road with an
official postal name. At least not around here, where streets get
On 8/3/2020 4:36 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2020, 15:29 Jmapb mailto:jm...@gmx.com>> wrote:
...Regardless, if this general approach is considered valid and
workable, then I'd like to propose the following answer to my original
question:
* Q) How should
On Mon, Aug 3, 2020, 15:29 Jmapb wrote:
>
> ...Regardless, if this general approach is considered valid and
> workable, then I'd like to propose the following answer to my original
> question:
>
> * Q) How should `addr:street` be tagged for an address along an
> unnamed way which is part of a
On 8/3/2020 6:07 AM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
There is some fuzzy matching, you can expect to work, for example
abbreviations like street -> st or even New York -> NY. But going from
ref=NY-214 to 'State Highway 214' is already a long stretch that requires
special local knowledge.
Understood.
On 31/07/2020 15.39, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
the authority for names are the local people. I would bet that some
of them would refer to this particular road as State Highway 214 if
they should name it in a formal way. NY 214 is a ref, no doubt, and
is fine to have, but so is State Highway
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 06:06:37PM -0400, Jmapb wrote:
> On 7/31/2020 4:24 PM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
>
> > Put one of the variants into addr:street and then all the variants
> > as alternative names onto the road. Obviously that stretch of road
> > is referred to under all these names, so this is
On 8/1/20 12:02, Paul Johnson wrote:
> For the way:
>
> name=Humble-Huffman Road
> ref=FM 1960
Oops. I got the name wrong, it's Humble Westfield Road, and it only
exists in OSM data because I haven't yet surveyed to be sure it's not
signed.
I'm pretty sure none of the current signs use this
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 12:19 AM Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
> On 7/31/20 14:29, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Name is only the name. Names are not refs. For the above example,
> > ref=NY 214, noname=yes would be the right way.
>
> How about the stretch of FM 1960 from I-45 or so going east into Humble?
>
On 8/1/2020 12:51 AM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Similarly, if you ask someone the name of the road in California with
ref="CA 96",
they will tell you "Highway 96" or perhaps "The river road". They
won't say
"Nah, it doesn't have a name, just a State highway number."
So in that situation, how
On 7/31/20 14:29, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Name is only the name. Names are not refs. For the above example,
> ref=NY 214, noname=yes would be the right way.
How about the stretch of FM 1960 from I-45 or so going east into Humble?
Addresses on it are " FM 1960 East", though I think it used to
Re: “There's no textual version of the name anywhere
(except as used for the addresses of residences and POIs."
That's the standard situation where I mapped in eastern Indonesia.
The highways almost never had street signs and official maps are absent
So I would use whatever names were used
> On Jul 31, 2020, at 12:45 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> So keep State Highway 214 in addr:street=* values, but that doesn't stop
> noname=yes and ref=NY 214 being the correct values for the way itself.
>
Which will, as I have found by experience, result in OSM QA tools flagging you
as the
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 5:53 PM Tod Fitch wrote:
>
>
> > On Jul 31, 2020, at 12:45 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> >
> > So keep State Highway 214 in addr:street=* values, but that doesn't stop
> noname=yes and ref=NY 214 being the correct values for the way itself.
> >
>
> Which will, as I have
On 7/31/2020 4:24 PM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
Put one of the variants into addr:street and then all the variants
as alternative names onto the road. Obviously that stretch of road
is referred to under all these names, so this is what we should map.
Putting aside the question of *which* variant
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 4:28 PM Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 3:16 PM Kevin Kenny
> wrote:
>
>> The reductio-ad-absurdum would be to argue that 42nd Street in Manhattan
>> should be `noname=yes ref=???` and participate in a route relation with
>> `network=US:NY:New York:Street
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 3:16 PM Kevin Kenny wrote:
> The reductio-ad-absurdum would be to argue that 42nd Street in Manhattan
> should be `noname=yes ref=???` and participate in a route relation with
> `network=US:NY:New York:Street ref=42`. I'm sure that would please strict
> taxonomists, but
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:44:13PM -0400, Jmapb wrote:
> On 7/31/2020 1:00 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > I'd go with the official address. It's not rare to find addresses in
> > the US where what goes on an envelope doesn't match what the street is
> > actually called. Nor is it rare to find the
On 31. Jul 2020, at 18:25, Jmapb wrote:
>
> But most of the ways in the route have no valid name. Segments were
> imported from TIGER with name=State Highway 214 but that's been removed
> in favor of ref=NY 214.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 12:01 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> around here we keep
So keep State Highway 214 in addr:street=* values, but that doesn't stop
noname=yes and ref=NY 214 being the correct values for the way itself.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 2:40 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 31. Jul 2020, at 21:31, Paul Johnson wrote:
> >
> > Name
On 7/31/2020 1:00 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
I'd go with the official address. It's not rare to find addresses in
the US where what goes on an envelope doesn't match what the street is
actually called. Nor is it rare to find the wiki to be wrong
Sometimes the official address is unclear.
sent from a phone
> On 31. Jul 2020, at 21:31, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> Name is only the name. Names are not refs. For the above example, ref=NY
> 214, noname=yes would be the right way.
the authority for names are the local people. I would bet that some of them
would refer to this
Given that it's not customary or advisable to reproduce ref in the name
field, kinda think that's not the worst policy for old_ref=* situations
that have no name, as well by extension, but that's a bit more of a grey
area still.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 2:14 PM Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> I agree.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 2:00 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 31. Jul 2020, at 18:25, Jmapb wrote:
> >
> > But most of the ways in the route have no valid name. Segments were
> > imported from TIGER with name=State Highway 214 but that's been removed
> > in favor
I agree.
Proof of this is that a section of road which was formerly US Highway 99,
but where the highway ref is now on a new bypass, will often by signed as
“Old Highway 99”, so it’s reasonable to say that the name=* was “Highway
99” before.
-Joseph Eisenberg
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 12:01 PM
sent from a phone
> On 31. Jul 2020, at 18:25, Jmapb wrote:
>
> But most of the ways in the route have no valid name. Segments were
> imported from TIGER with name=State Highway 214 but that's been removed
> in favor of ref=NY 214.
around here we keep both, no need to remove the name if it
On 31/07/2020 14.02, Kevin Kenny wrote:
The `addr:street` should match what goes on the address label that a
delivery driver will be reading.
Ordinarily, that's the signed name of the street, if the street has a
name. Rural New York has many streets that will have a `ref=* noname=yes`
-
.On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 12:25 PM Jmapb wrote:
> Hi all, what's the best way to tag the addr:street of an address along a
> highway route?
>
> Example, I'm mapping houses and POIs along NY 212:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/411064
>
> Some segments of the route are tagged name=Main
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 11:24 AM Jmapb wrote:
> Is it best to simply tag addr:street=NY 214, matching the ref tag of the
> segment and the name tag of the route? This isn't consistent with the
> wiki, which specifically says addr:street should match the *name* of a
> nearby *way*.
I'd go with
Hi all, what's the best way to tag the addr:street of an address along a
highway route?
Example, I'm mapping houses and POIs along NY 212:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/411064
Some segments of the route are tagged name=Main Street and the addresses
there use Main Street for their
31 matches
Mail list logo
