I agree that in places where a joint name is in use, that should be documented as `name=Booraghee / Bradleys Head`as. From a data perspective, I think it is also useful to know that the english called it (in english spelling) `name:en=Bradleys Head` and the locals called it (in local romanised spelling) `name:aus=Booraghee`.
I have no great understanding of the languages involved, but I want to see it as "Booraghee / Bradleys Head" on most maps (because that's part of our cultural style, as documented in the quoted policy). On the other hand, when I hook up a routing text-to-speech engine, I'm going to have a much better time pronouncing the spelling of `name:en` and `name:aus`. Even better after someone in the know replaces the vague and non-specific `:aus` form with the actual language(s). On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 at 09:27, Little Maps <[email protected]> wrote: > This may depend on the specific place but in many places I believe Phil’s > interpretation is correct and Andrew’s is inappropriate. Many places and > reserves now have joint management or co-ownership, and dual/joint names. > Joint names are not alternative names. John Roberts-Smith is John > Roberts-Smith. He is not John Roberts and/or alt-name John Smith. The Rock > Nature Reserve / Kengal Aboriginal Place is a legislated reserve. This is > the legislated name, as described in the management plan and signposted on > all new signs. Since OSM maps what is on the ground, we should include the > entire joint name in the one name tag. We are not listing alternatives, we > are presenting the entire, signposted, legal name in the one tag. > _______________________________________________ > 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
