Hi,
Is there any advantage to tagging addresses with the state when the
state is already well defined in OSM and the state for a given address
location can be obtained from existing map data?
I'm not criticising Justin's work - improved consistency is good. I'm
asking the open ended question: is there a better way of recording this
data that avoids duplication?
Regards,
Kim
On 29/1/22 23:56, tabjsina wrote:
Hello,
I'm new to this mailing list (and mailing lists in general), apologies
if I'm doing it wrong :)
I've recently made a maproulette challenge which asked users to
confirm updating any populating addr:state value in Western Australia
to "WA", if it was something else. Previously, about 90% were already
"WA", 9% were a variation like "Western Australia", "wa" (lowercase),
and the remaining were something completely wrong, like "AU" or a
suburb/city name.
Now that WA is all fixed, I was looking at other states, and noticed
that, while most states also had a similar 90% rate of using acronym,
NSW and moreso VIC had a closer split between the acronym and the full
name.
Before I go ahead with setting up this maproulette challenge for the
rest of the country, I wanted to get some thoughts on whether it makes
sense to standardize around using acronyms (WA, ACT, NSW, NT, QLD,
VIC, SA, TAS), full name (Western Australia, Australian Capital
Territory, etc), or whether we should not be trying to standardise
this value at all.
Thanks,
Justin
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
