On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Steven Johnson wrote:
If you want to see the mother of all street naming trainwrecks, have a look at Hickory, NC. Story goes that sometime back in the '30's, the city fathers/mothers thought they would rationalize street naming. But what makes sense on gridded streets makes an *awful* mnemonic device for wayfinding, especially in the hilly, western piedmont of NC. You also have some really perverse examples of streetnaming, like "19th Ave Pl NW".
Thanks for the other data point. In case I didn't make it already clear in my other emails, what I am saying is that maybe always displaying the directionals is not always the best way to present them. I do not know what the correct solution is. However, I am not advocating the complete suppression except in limited cases. For example, when the directional is more of a positive/negative for an address than specifying a region of the city, such as the case in Salt Lake City. The decision to suppress directionals in this limited case should be evaluated on a city by city bases and by those who are familiar with the area.
Rather than look to paper maps and Google for how they map it, it may be more useful to look at how local E911 services and USPS treat these addresses.
That is not going to help, what is at issue here (at least for me) is what should be displayed as part of the street name of a map. Not what goes into the address.
There are times when a street type (e.g. Ave, St, Ln, Pl) is part of the name (e.g. 19th Ave Pl NW, where "Ave" is part of the street name) and times when the directional prefix/suffix (e.g. N, S, E W) are part of the street name (e.g. "North Temple"). I think only local knowledge is the way to resolve these issues.
Yes local knowledge is the only way to resolve it. _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
