I was using official_name=* for this already (like stores with ridiculously long names) - I just realized this might be completely undocumented.
Javbw > On Sep 27, 2015, at 8:37 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 27/09/2015 8:21 PM, Peter wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> we've detecting more and more long names for highways, like I once >> reported here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/karussell/diary/26055 >> >> One example: >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/51109811 >> >> As discussed there the names are from official source, but should we >> really include this in the name tag? > > Why not put it as the alternate name? This way the 'official name' is > recorded for all to see. > > The name= I'd use would be what the locals call it .. or what is on a sign > post. It won't be long (I'd think). > >> >> I've posted this to the OSM forum already and there seem to be a bit >> controversial answers :) >> http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=50717 >> >> But I agree with 'SomeoneElse' that description should not go into the name. >> What is common sense here? > > Descriptions do not go into the name tag. > But if the 'official name' is that then it goes in. > > If it has no name then there are tags for that too! key:noname=yes > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noname > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
