Hi Rob, This is a really useful tool and I've already started making tweaks to address data based on it.
Could I make a suggestion? I think an ampersand is a legitimate character to see in an address or street name: Other Odd Characters Street names containing anything other than letters, punctuation, spaces and numbers. Regular expression: /[^A-Za-z0-9 '\.,:;()/\\-]/. SectorPostcodeMappedDominant Street Name WF1 1 <http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/addresses/pc-stats/WF/WF1/1/> WF1 1UQ 2 <http://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22addr:postcode%22=%22WF1+1UQ%22+global&R> George␣&␣Crown␣Yard In this example, the street they're on is given by https://osm.org/way/252054368 Thanks again. Regards, *Paul* On 29 January 2018 at 09:27, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) < robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 29 January 2018 at 09:18, Lester Caine <les...@lsces.co.uk> wrote: > > So it ignores a simple 'name' ? which is why a lot of my streets are > getting > > tagged as wrong? I don't see any reason to have to add addr:street= when > the > > road already has name= ... The adjacent building use addr:street= ... > > You're right that it doesn't look at the name=* key (except on > associatedStreet relations). But that shouldn't be a problem, as the > tool is only checking objects with an addr:postcode=* tag -- which > should be houses and other addressable premises, not the roads/streets > themselves. Sorry if that wasn't clear in my original post. (There's > currently no check that the values in addr:street=* on premises match > the name=* any mapped highway=* nearby.) > > If you're not sure what's causing anything that's flagged by the tool, > let me know know the postcode(s) and I'll take a look. > > Robert. > > -- > Robert Whittaker > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
