2014-05-15 8:27 GMT+01:00 Steven Horner <[email protected]>: > Thank you all for the advice, although it may have confused me all the more > with different suggestions. > > Personally I like Marc's suggestion of using the 2 street names separated by > a hyphen. This allows both names to be rendered.
Seems OK to me (though I would have chosen slash, but whatever), and we can fondly hope that renderers will one day detect the "name:left" and "name:right" tags and render those cleverly when found. > Then identifying each street with left and right tags. How do you chose which > is which if the road runs East to West? Use the direction of the way, i.e. the direction in which the OSM object was drawn. > I'm amazed this doesn't crop up constantly, any old terraced streets with a > road separating them would have the issue. I can think of about a dozen > streets within 1 mile of me where this is the case. > > I will do some more investigation and look at several different mapped areas > to see how they have been tagged, doesn't sound like there is a definitive > answer. When I sometimes encountered it, I "solved" the problem by putting the different streetnames on the building addresses, and ignoring the issue on the way itself. I wasn't aware of "name:left" etc! Dan >> Let me first introduce myself, I'm a Belgian mapper that has been lurking >> for a few months on this mailing list. The reason is that I want to learn >> how other communities work and which problems they have and how they solve >> them. >> >> Now back to the topic: in Belgium it's quite common to have streets with two >> names, at least when they are on the border of two villages. The Belgian >> community decided to map this as follows: >> name = name1 - name2 >> name:left = name1 >> name:right = name2 >> >> An example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/207455046 >> >> What are your thoughts about this ? >> >> regards >> >> m >> >> >> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:07 PM, SK53 <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> There are at least two major streets in the middle of Nottingham like this: >>> logically the street does not have a name, the sides of the street have >>> names: >>> >>> North of the Council House, the S side is Smith Row, the N side is Long Row >>> South of the Council House, the S side is Poultry, the N side Cheapside >>> (originally Rotten Row) >>> >>> These names originate as locations in the market square, as can be seen by >>> other survivals such as Beastmarket Hill. Where the square is now an open >>> plaza the name of the rows of buildings have been transferred to the >>> thoroughfare. The addresses on Cheapside are even more complex because the >>> shops also have entrances in Exchange Arcade and are let as units of this >>> shopping arcade. The Austin Reed shop appears to have at least 4 addresses >>> from the Royal Mail, OS, Nottingham council & Austin Reed website: all in >>> all a mess. >>> >>> Other places where this occurs include: Sherwin Road/Castle Boulevard, >>> where the W end of Sherwin Road has houses with Castle Boulevard addresses >>> on the S side. In this case I resolved it by tagging the footpath with the >>> Caste Boulevard name. This discrepancy arose because the two roads were >>> merged when the roundabout was built in the 1920s. >>> >>> I recently noticed a case where the Land Registry data for a small new >>> build terrace had been resolved by using the name of the terrace as a >>> building name. Fail. In some towns (Bangor, N. Wales, comes to mind) many >>> houses were built as named terraces with numbers within the terrace. >>> Although Bangor has been relatively recently house-numbered a simple >>> inspection of addresses painted on rubbish bins suggests that the original >>> addresses are still in use. >>> >>> Broadly speaking we should try and do this better than the OS Open Data >>> because it does happen fairly frequently. name:left and name:right can be >>> used even if no-one consumes them at present. It is useful to try and map >>> addresses in such cases, and these are the one case where I am happy to use >>> the associatedStreet relation. This at least enables the correct grouping >>> of entities for the 'street'. >>> >>> Perhaps the challenge is twofold: >>> >>> Persuading people that streets with addresses might not be named. (The >>> Royal Mail seems generally to adopt a Procrustean solution to force >>> everything to fit PAF). >>> Working out how to consume such data (mainly for rendering). >>> >>> Jerry >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 14 May 2014 10:07, Richard Mann <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> There's one like that in Oxford (for about 30 metres) - street addresses >>>> different on the two sides. For the moment it has name="St Clements >>>> Street", alt_name="London Place", and a separate footway with name="London >>>> Place" (plus a name:note). >>>> >>>> So my suggestion - draw separate footways, and give them names. Use >>>> name/alt_name on the road, or name = "one name / other name" if both seem >>>> equally valid. >>>> >>>> Richard >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Steven Horner <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> It's interesting and highlights a few problems local to me, some I had >>>>> buried my head in the sand temporarily because I don't know how to fix >>>>> them correctly. My biggest problem when tagging roads is what to name a >>>>> road when either side of the road is a different street. For instance the >>>>> analysis highlights "Myrtle Grove" as missing here: >>>>> http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/map_browser?bbox=415474,536751,415809,537148&referrer=area >>>>> >>>>> Myrtle grove is the South side of the road labeled Chestnut Grove and >>>>> continues around to where the Road is labeled Elm Gardens. Almost all of >>>>> the streets in the estate are like this, where it is very misleading >>>>> because opposite sides of the road is a different named street. How >>>>> should this be mapped, I have steered clear of fixing it because I >>>>> couldn't find any guidance on how it should be labeled and technically is >>>>> it even wrong. The actual building footprints I have added the correct >>>>> addresses to. >>>>> >>>>> I use various OS products in my day job and interestingly OSM labels the >>>>> streets exactly the same as Vectormap Local does, anyone looking at >>>>> either OS or OSM maps would not be able to find Myrtle Grove. Another >>>>> street where I have always though was labeled wrong in the village is >>>>> Roddymoor Road, there is no street sign and I have near heard anyone >>>>> refer to it as this. The street on part of this road is not labeled >>>>> (buildings are) it is East Terrace and that's how anyone describing it or >>>>> looking at signs would describe it. Again OS do this the same which is >>>>> probably why OSM has it tagged like this. >>>>> >>>>> All of this highlights that while OS Locator may have a difference and is >>>>> fantastic for finding potential problems, changing it so OS Locator >>>>> comparisons are 100% may not be the correct solution? >>>>> >>>>> Any help appreciated and apologies if I should ask in a different list, >>>>> surely this is an incredibly common problem that I have somehow missed >>>>> the obvious solution to. >>>>> >>>>> regards, >>>>> Steven >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Shaun McDonald >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> ITO’s OSM Analysis has been updated with the latest OS Locator data. >>>>>> Most places have dropped out of the 100% completeness compared to OS >>>>>> Locator. There’s now 18 places which have less than 95% completeness. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main >>>>>> >>>>>> Shaun McDonald >>>>>> Developer >>>>>> ITO World >>>>>> _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
