On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 12:58 PM Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> wrote:
> No, no.  I'm not proposing addr:street on ways at all, only on things that 
> actually have an address.  What I am saying is that noname=yes should be a 
> trigger to validators that they can't depend on the way to handle address 
> validation.  Just saying that name=County Road 34, ref=CR 34 is wrong; 
> noname=yes; ref=CR 34 is the way to go.

OK, and that's where we disagree - one important _suggestion_ that a
validator can make is to point out that there's no similarly-named way
anywhere nearby. At least once I've done the house numbers for a whole
street without remembering to change the name of the street from the
previous one I was working on, and I was glad that the validator
caught it before I uploaded!

(If you're now going to tell me "don't make mistakes like that!" my
reply is, "Good luck with that one!")

I think we can both agree that in practice there is no clear consensus
on what to do in the specific case where a road has a reference but no
other name. (That is intended as an entirely neutral statement - not
"Kevin's right" or "Paul's right")

73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin

Tagging mailing list

Reply via email to