Matthew, Just one concern - Removing of addr:city. I encourage people to include addr:city since it's part of their mailing address and could easily be outside of the city limits. While addr:city isn't needed inside of city boundaries since it can be obtained from their spatial location, does make it much easier to full addresses from OSM. I would recommend not removing addr:city.
My perspective is from the states where I'm familiar with how the US Postal service operates. If this isn't true in Canada - please ignore. Clifford On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 7:21 AM, Matthew Darwin <matt...@mdarwin.ca> wrote: > I want to bump up this thread to see what other opinions are out there. > If you are supportive to remove the addr:province and addr:country tags in > Canada, please speak up. I don't like making big changes with only 1 > comment. (If you like, feel free to reply privately to me avoid bombarding > the list with "me too" and I will summarize the replies on the list). > Prior to starting this discussion, I too have been removing these tags when > I come across them (a few places in London, ON had country=US???) > > Alternately my proposal would be to: > > - change addr:state => addr:province > - add ~2.7 million missing addr:province / addr:country where they > don't exist > - an then then to standardize what we are putting into those fields. > eg for addr:province in Ontario: ON, on, Ontario, ONTARIO, Ont, ont, or the > several other variations that exist today. ("ON" is most popular, followed > by "Ontario") > > If you don't like either of the above, I would really like to hear why > having the tags in some places but not others is a good thing. As you may > have noticed based on my posts over the last few weeks that I like to have > things (more) consistent, unless there is a (good) reason not to be > consistent. > > > On 2018-02-16 12:52 PM, Alan Richards wrote: > > I typically remove these tags when I come across them, as yes, I've heard > the same argument that they're redundant. > > I like all this cleanup you've been doing with phone numbers, addresses, > etc. Kudos! > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 9:40 AM, Matthew Darwin <matt...@mdarwin.ca> > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> During the discussion of cleaning up municipality names in Canada, it was >> suggested that the addr:city could be removed entirely if the appropriate >> boundaries are defined. I would hazard to guess (and will endeavour to >> investigate) that the addr:city and the boundaries do not always align in >> Canada (there are ~11300 administrative boundaries of some type and there >> are ~7000 unique addr:city tags)... so this will be a much more long term >> effort. >> >> However, the provincial/territorial boundaries are defined, so removing >> the addr:country, addr:provice and addr:state tags might be a more >> reasonable at this time. (addr:country is used ~94% less than addr:street) >> >> Tags, by number of occurrences: >> >> 167902 addr:country >> >> 33252 addr:state >> >> 179741 addr:province >> >> 2950115 addr:city >> >> 2942159 addr:street >> >> 2934341 addr:housenumber >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca