On 25/01/2019 17:30, Jack FitzSimons via Talk-GB wrote:
I've noticed that many bank branches have a unique postcode while the shops either side of them all share a single postcode. When the bank branch closes (as so many do these days) the unique postcode finds its way on to Robert's old postal district list. A new occupant of the bank premises is likely to be given the same postcode as the other shops nearby. Do we need to retain the old postcode for any historical purpose? If so we probably also need to tag that this building was once a bank but if we do that for every previous occupant of every shop things would soon get out of hand! While the bank is empty and, hence, no longer listed on the PAF, is it better to retain the old postcode or delete it and show no postcode for that building?
Those would be "large user" postcodes, assigned to recipients that get a lot of mail. A large user postcode is assigned to the organisation, not the premises, so if the organisation leaves the premises then the postcode either moves with them or becomes unassigned. So the correct thing to do, in your scenario, would be to either blank out the postcode or, by interpolation, change it to be the same as those either side.
I'm not sure if CodePoint Open includes a field showing whether a postcode is large user or not, but the ONS Postcode Database (which is also OGL, so compatible with OSM) does. So you can check against that if necessary. Another advantage of ONSPD over Codepoint Open is that it includes deleted postcodes (with a deletion date), which is handy for cross-referencing your other scenario of postcodes that have changed but where an old one is still displayed on company literature.
Mark _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
