(It was good to meet you at SOTM US last year).
Thanks for your comments... The situation with addr:city appears to me
to be more complex than the situation with addr:province/addr:country,
along the lines of what you are mentioning. My personal home mailing
address cannot be resolved in OSM because the mailing address does not
match any of the boundaries. (OSM boundaries are correct, but the
official post address cannot be resolved from the boundaries). So I
have a feeling that addr:city is going to be required, at least in
Do you have a view on addr:province/addr:state or addr:country?
US/Canada probably have more similarities than differences, so your
input is very welcome.
On 2018-02-19 10:36 AM, Clifford Snow wrote:
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.
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 7:21 AM, Matthew Darwin <matt...@mdarwin.ca
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
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 <mailto:matt...@mdarwin.ca>> wrote:
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
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:
Talk-ca mailing list
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
Talk-ca mailing list